Re: [earlywarning] comment on draft-rosen-atoca-server-discovery

"Hannes Tschofenig" <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> Wed, 21 July 2010 09:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E92593A695B for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:00:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OFlwP7EkLzHI for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:00:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7D5213A687A for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:00:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 28764 invoked by uid 0); 21 Jul 2010 09:00:47 -0000
Received: from 212.67.227.34 by www062.gmx.net with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:00:46 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:00:46 +0200
From: "Hannes Tschofenig" <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB77313F@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
Message-ID: <20100721090046.160050@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03E9DCD280@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <4C4590D4.8070601@gmx.net> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB77313F@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
To: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
X-Authenticated: #29516787
X-Flags: 0001
X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 6100 (Global Message Exchange)
X-Priority: 3
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/bUFFetT7b/E6Jf0cPvxvYy05KwqSMu9JLdESxg2 Zb2MYIy0azlV9yZdTclBePx3AabpgsjADtYQ==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-GMX-UID: Wt4jDetKfW47Tsk5tWRoQntudmllckW/
X-FuHaFi: 0.56999999999999995
Cc: earlywarning@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [earlywarning] comment on draft-rosen-atoca-server-discovery
X-BeenThere: earlywarning@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for Authority-to-Individuals \(Early Warning\) Emergency " <earlywarning.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/earlywarning>
List-Post: <mailto:earlywarning@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:00:34 -0000

Hi Martin, 

I agree that it would be desirable to have a single format for alerts only. I do, however, not expect this to happen. 

Additionally, there will be a number of ways to convey alerts (the transport aspect, like we have it with other protocols as well). 

Hence, in the context with this specific document I was expecting that LoST would allow us to discover the format/transport mechanism through which a client can obtain these alerts. This would be very much in line with the way how we designed LoST to work for regular emergency services as well. 

Do you think that this makes sense?

Ciao
Hannes

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 06:40:09 +0800
> Von: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
> An: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
> CC: "earlywarning@ietf.org" <earlywarning@ietf.org>
> Betreff: RE: [earlywarning] comment on draft-rosen-atoca-server-discovery

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 20 July 2010 10:05 PM
> > 
> > Hi Martin,
> > 
> > please expand a bit on what you meant with the GeoRSS comment.
> > 
> > The reason for having GeoRSS mentioned in there is that GeoRSS is quite
> > widely used for distributing alerts and there will always be different
> > ways to distribute alerts.
> > 
> > Are you suggesting not to use GeoRSS?
> 
> Not at all, though I am pointing out that GeoRSS provides some of the same
> capabilities that CAP does: it includes parameters for time, author, and
> location.  Having duplicated functions might result in an interoperability
> mismatch - one implementation expects location in CAP, another omits it in
> favour of the GeoRSS.  Any specification will have to deal with this.  If
> there is already experience in the matter, then looking at existing behaviour
> will certainly help.
> 
> > 
> > Ciao
> > Hannes
> >