Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-03 feedback
Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org> Mon, 31 October 2016 18:15 UTC
Return-Path: <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5181299A3 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 11:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <dvEiIvx6tXHt>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "MIME-Version"
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dvEiIvx6tXHt for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 11:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 257ED12946F for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 11:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 11:15:11 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240601d43d39fb088b@[99.111.97.136]>
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR17MB107171FFC603A9DA683B5DBFA7C70@MWHPR17MB1071.namprd17.prod.ou tlook.com>
References: <MWHPR17MB107171FFC603A9DA683B5DBFA7C70@MWHPR17MB1071.namprd17.prod.ou tlook.com>
X-Mailer: Eudora for Mac OS X
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 11:15:09 -0700
To: Dan Banks <DBanks@ddti.net>, "ecrit@ietf.org" <ecrit@ietf.org>
From: Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/Ds8wHBhRgM7lqcvIrH0JGS8swwI>
Cc: "Rosen, Brian (Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz)" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-03 feedback
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ecrit/>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 18:15:13 -0000
At 9:06 PM +0000 10/6/16, Dan Banks wrote: > I have been working on an implementation of the similar location > mechanism described by draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-03, and > have some feedback: > > 1) > For completeLocation, the actual element name in the schema is > "completedlocation", with a 'd' and lowercase 'l'. It appears this > should be "completeLocation". There is also a use of > "completedLocation" on page 5 that should be changed. Also, there > will only be a single completeLocation returned. I agree; these should be addressed. > 2) > An element "returnedLocationResponse" is defined by the schema, but > not discussed in the text or illustrated in the examples: I agree, this should be addressed. > 3) > It is desirable to have away for a client to specifically request > RLI, instead of it being included any time that validation is > performed. Responses with multiple similar locations can quickly > become large compared to responses without RLI, and may also incur > additional processing cost at the server. This could be wasteful > if automated validation is being performed or if the RLI is > otherwise not understood or discarded. I suggest an attribute be > added to the findService request (perhaps rli:returnLocation) with > defined values of { "none" | "similar" | "complete" | "any" } to > indicate which return location types the client is interested in. > Further, I suggest that the server be restricted to including only > RLI types in the response that are requested, and that omitting the > attribute from the request is equivalent to > rli:returnLocation="none". This seems worth discussing. > 5) > I would like to suggest that each element that users the > locationInformation pattern should only represent one location. > That is, instead of a single similarLocation element containing > multiple civicAddress elements (as illustrated in the example), > multiple similarLocation elements should be used with each > containing a single civicAddress. This seems helpful. -- Randall Gellens Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak for myself only -------------- Randomly selected tag: --------------- f u cn rd ths, itn tyg h myxbl cd.
- [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-03 feed… Dan Banks
- Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-03 … Randall Gellens