Re: [Ecrit] Discussion on draft-winterbottom-ecrit-priv-loc-04

I'd ask why do you think you are in a better position to know.

I supsect I could make the same assertion against the NENA work with much the same level of confidence.

I do know what the asserted position of at least a couple of the European regulators is.

Keith 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ecrit [mailto:ecrit-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rosen, Brian
> Sent: 29 July 2014 23:22
> To: Marc Linsner
> Cc: ecrit_ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Discussion on 
> draft-winterbottom-ecrit-priv-loc-04
> 
> Let's also qualify that "In Europe" is this specific ETSI 
> work.  There is other work (EENA) that uses the IETF approach 
> holistically.  It may be that the ETSI work succeeds and is 
> deployed in some countries for some time, but I would not 
> recommend betting against the EENA approach long term.
> 
> Brian
> 
> On Jul 29, 2014, at 5:13 PM, Marc Linsner (mlinsner) 
> <mlinsner@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Winterbottom <a.james.winterbottom@gmail.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 at 4:58 PM
> > To: "Rosen, Brian" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz>
> > Cc: Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com>, "ecrit_ietf.org"
> > <ecrit@ietf.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Discussion on 
> > draft-winterbottom-ecrit-priv-loc-04
> > 
> >> Brian,
> >> 
> >> If this really is your sentiment then why are we having 
> this debate?
> >> By your own admission LbyR in LoST requires at least some rough 
> >> location, this doesn¹t meet the requirements we have outlined.
> >> The routing returned in HELD will meet the requirements in Europe, 
> >> can¹t we just get on with producing a spec please?
> > 
> > 
> > The problem is the requirements are for the most part fallacious.
> > 
> > When queried why the VSP can¹t have LbyV if it¹s covered by their 
> > EULA, the answer is, in that case they can have LbyV.
> > 
> > -Marc-
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >> Cheers
> >> James
> >> 
> >> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Right, it's a query no matter which entity does it, or which 
> >>>> protocol is used.
> >>> Yeah.  That¹s why even though I have a preference for 
> >>> LoST-does-LbyR, I am not really against HELD-returns-route.
> >>> 
> >>> Brian
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ecrit mailing list
> >> Ecrit@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ecrit mailing list
> > Ecrit@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> 