[Ecrit] Document Action: 'Synchronizing Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol based Service Boundaries and Mapping Elements' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-18.txt)
The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Thu, 12 July 2012 22:53 UTC
Return-Path: <iesg-secretary@ietf.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 2959E21F859A; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.559
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DZAMPlpEZGhP; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FF3821F859E; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.30p3
Message-ID: <20120712225339.23992.9832.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:53:39 -0700
Cc: ecrit chair <ecrit-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, ecrit mailing list <ecrit@ietf.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: [Ecrit] Document Action: 'Synchronizing Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol based Service Boundaries and Mapping Elements' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-18.txt)
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 22:53:40 -0000
The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Synchronizing Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol based Service Boundaries and Mapping Elements' (draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-18.txt) as Experimental RFC This document is the product of the Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Robert Sparks and Gonzalo Camarillo. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync/ Technical Summary The Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) protocol (RFC5222) is an XML-based protocol for mapping service identifiers and geodetic or civic location information to service URIs and service boundaries. In particular, it can be used to determine the location-appropriate Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) for emergency services. The main data structure, the <mapping> element, used for encapsulating information about service boundaries is defined in the LoST protocol specification and circumscribes the region within which all locations map to the same service Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or set of URIs for a given service. This document defines an XML protocol to exchange these mappings between two nodes. This mechanism is designed for the exchange of authoritative <mapping> elements between two entities. Exchanging cached <mapping> elements, i.e. non-authoritative elements, is possible but not envisioned. In any case, this document can also be used without the LoST protocol even though the format of the <mapping> element is re-used from the LoST specification. Working Group Summary There is consensus in the WG to publish this document. Document Quality The LoST Sync protocol was implemented during the development of RFC 5222 specification. This extension has been tested in various company-internal implementations, as reported to the wg chairs. Two open source implementations were made available by Columbia University and by Goettingen University. Interoperability tests between them have been made. The code produced by Goettingen University is available (at the time of this announcement) at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/heldandlost/files/ The LoST specification has experienced extensive review, including reviews by other SDOs.