Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11.txt (was: Ecrit Digest, Vol 187, Issue 52)

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

Please see inline:

--Randall

On 5 Oct 2021, at 10:41, Dan Banks wrote:

> Regarding the examples in section 3, I'm a bit uncomfortable with 
> addresses not being expressed in a way that is consistent with the 
> CLDXF profile (fully spelled out), although I agree that they can 
> still communicate the concepts while using abbreviations.  I would 
> prefer that we modify these to use fully spelled STS and POD values 
> since CLDXF is supposed to be the official profile for the locations 
> being used.  And IIRC, CLDXF also requires the use of <country>.

[RG] This seems reasonable.


> However, the point you make about missing country is important for 
> another, more basic reason.  While <country> is minOccurs="0" in the 
> civicAddress schema of RFC 5139, for all practical purposes a LoST 
> server (with less than global coverage, at least) cannot be expected 
> to know if it (or another server) is authoritative for a queried 
> location if that location does not include country.  Because of this, 
> our implementation considers civic locations without country to be 
> invalid - not in the <locationValidation> <invalid> list sense, but in 
> the <locationInvalid> error sense.
>
> So, I think the first example where the complete location adds 
> country, A1, and PC is a poor example.  In order for this to occur, 
> the LoST server would need to know that the remaining elements are 
> globally unique in combination - or more practically, that there is 
> only one A3 = "Seattle" in the world.

[RG] It seems to me that, in practice, an LVF will have a limited scope 
(a particular area), and hence will assume an omitted country (or even 
state) is the one in which it is authoritative or in which it is part of 
the LoST tree.  But I do agree that one use of this extension is to 
complete an address to make it pedantically correct rather than just 
sufficient to find the intended address, and in that sense, showing an 
omitted country corrected to include it is good.

> Additionally, I believe the later example of input and similar 
> addresses should also include country.

[RG] I agree that it would be good to also include country.


>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ecrit <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Victor Burton
>> Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 1:22 PM
>> To: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11.txt (was: 
>> Ecrit Digest,
>> Vol 187, Issue 52)
>>
>> Introduction: Delete "timely".
>> Use of this enhancement increases the likelihood that the correct 
>> and/or
>> complete
>>    form of a civic location becomes timely known in those cases where 
>> it
>>    is incomplete or incorrect.
>>
>> Terminology: Replace "can be" with is
>> Location:  The term Location can be used to refer to either a civic 
>> location or a
>> geodetic location.
>>
>> Section 3: Include "US" in the similarLocation address returned from 
>> LoST. It's
>> a required CAType for addresses submitted to the ECRF, correct?
>>    Similar address #1: 6000 15th Ave NW Seattle, WA 98107 US
>>
>>    Similar address #2: 6000 15th Ave NE Seattle, WA 98105 US After 
>> reading
>> the example in section 5.2 which aligns with section 3, the Input 
>> address:
>> 6000 15th Ave N Seattle, WA. should also include US. I assume the LVF 
>> will
>> validate an address without <country> but then the description in 
>> section 3
>> would need to state that, correct?
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ecrit <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of 
>> [e-mail]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 12:02 PM
>> To: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Ecrit Digest, Vol 187, Issue 52
>>
>>
>> WARNING: External Email: Exercise Caution
>>
>> Send Ecrit mailing list submissions to
>>         [e-mail]
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fww
>> w.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fecrit&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%
>> 40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234b0036a108d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29
>> c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C637687173040020776%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbG
>> Zsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
>> Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=0F20KJpZD1t0XP3OMpP6GVcFyW8dHxozi0xo
>> xWDELlI%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         [e-mail]
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         [e-mail]
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific 
>> than "Re:
>> Contents of Ecrit digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. I-D Action: draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11.txt
>>       ([e-mail])
>>    2. WGLC draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11 -- end date Oct 13
>>       (Randall Gellens)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:07:46 -0700
>> From: [e-mail]
>> To: <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: [e-mail]
>> Subject: [Ecrit] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11.txt
>> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the Emergency Context Resolution with 
>> Internet
>> Technologies WG of the IETF.
>>
>>         Title           : A LoST extension to return complete and 
>> similar location info
>>         Authors         : Brian Rosen
>>                           Roger Marshall
>>                           Jeff Martin
>>         Filename        : draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11.txt
>>         Pages           : 18
>>         Date            : 2021-09-29
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    This document introduces a new way to provide returned location
>>    information in LoST responses that is either of a completed or
>>    similar form to the original input civic location, based on 
>> whether
>>    valid or invalid civic address elements are returned within the
>>    <findServiceResponse> message.  This document defines a new 
>> extension
>>    to the <findServiceResponse> message within the LoST protocol
>>    [RFC5222] that enables the LoST protocol to return in a response a
>>    completed civic address element set for a valid location response,
>>    and one or more suggested sets of similar location information for 
>> an
>>    invalid location.  These two types of civic addresses are referred 
>> to
>>    as either "complete location" or "similar location", and are 
>> included
>>    as a compilation of CAtype xml elements within the existing LoST
>>    <findServiceResponse> message structure.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdata
>> tracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-ecrit-similar-
>> location%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234
>> b0036a108d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C
>> 637687173040020776%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwM
>> DAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata
>> =G1%2BBRTNV8IFiHIbVG8rjXnOFO0fKKozuHSuvDzLAr6M%3D&amp;reserve
>> d=0
>>
>> There is also an htmlized version available at:
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdata
>> tracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-
>> 11&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234b0036a108
>> d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C637687173
>> 040030772%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIj
>> oiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=Lr0HdMj
>> HXSxysWCELfIGUBQFRzUvVGBxGxCFKJGNDlU%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fww
>> w.ietf.org%2Frfcdiff%3Furl2%3Ddraft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-
>> 11&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234b0036a108
>> d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C637687173
>> 040030772%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIj
>> oiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=6Rv0F%
>> 2Bx0oVvrhZCfnuTSRNhvseRKkaR4%2BNmMhuRHQYM%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=ftp%3A%2F%2Fftp.ietf
>> .org%2Finternet-
>> drafts%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234b0
>> 036a108d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C63
>> 7687173040030772%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMD
>> AiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=
>> TXVZQCG7lGkCnzt0bnmBOb6HWf0ZJDAF1YZ%2BeGI3aXM%3D&amp;reserv
>> ed=0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:51:36 -0700
>> From: "Randall Gellens" <[e-mail]>
>> To: ECRIT <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: [Ecrit] WGLC draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11 -- end 
>> date
>>         Oct 13
>> Message-ID: <6AA591C6-B84B-4A7E-936A-
>> [e-mail]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown
>>
>> This starts WGLC for draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-11, a LoST 
>> extension to
>> return complete or similar location info.
>>
>> Please send both comments and messages that you support advancement 
>> of
>> the draft to this mailing list before October 13.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> --Randall
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ecrit mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fww
>> w.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fecrit&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%
>> 40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234b0036a108d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29
>> c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C637687173040030772%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbG
>> Zsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
>> Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=vc7NVYnhCFBaQPEtTxvWDYVd8rB2UNH0T76L
>> qrsJ8Ao%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of Ecrit Digest, Vol 187, Issue 52
>> **************************************
>> NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: This email, including attachments, may contain
>> information which is confidential, proprietary, attorney-client 
>> privileged and /
>> or controlled under U.S. export laws and regulations and may be 
>> restricted
>> from disclosure by applicable State and Federal law. Nothing in this 
>> email
>> shall create any legal binding agreement between the parties unless
>> expressly stated herein and provided by an authorized representative 
>> of
>> Comtech Telecommunications Corp. or its subsidiaries. If you are not 
>> the
>> intended recipient of this message, be advised that any 
>> dissemination,
>> distribution, or use of the contents of this message is strictly 
>> prohibited. If
>> you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by 
>> return
>> email and permanently delete all copies of the original email and any
>> attached documentation from any computer or other media.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ecrit mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fww
>> w.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fecrit&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cdbanks%
>> 40ddti.net%7Cf17bc75b13234b0036a108d9851af0e2%7C4c0f48ba5f2944b1b29
>> c1aff8251101b%7C0%7C0%7C637687173040030772%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbG
>> Zsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
>> Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=vc7NVYnhCFBaQPEtTxvWDYVd8rB2UNH0T76L
>> qrsJ8Ao%3D&amp;reserved=0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit