[Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt
"Eric Gray" <eric.gray@ericsson.com> Mon, 24 September 2007 13:53 UTC
Return-path: <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZoNJ-0001bm-1T; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:53:25 -0400
Received: from gen-art by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IZoNH-0001ao-SU for gen-art-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:53:23 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZoNH-0001Wv-Ii; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:53:23 -0400
Received: from imr1.ericy.com ([198.24.6.9]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZoN6-0008Gx-BO; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:53:18 -0400
Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l8OE0BHG011812; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:00:11 -0500
Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:52:47 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:52:44 -0500
Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF01A0FB58@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <5FB585F183235B42A9E70095055136FB1E5516@DEMUEXC012.nsn-intra.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt
Thread-Index: Acf6NwSJXtzoHQWJTfa5KTFy9wttCABeVOHQALeNslAACNW/IA==
References: <46F03C1A.3020905@ericsson.com> <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF019E0D5F@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> <5FB585F183235B42A9E70095055136FB1E5516@DEMUEXC012.nsn-intra.net>
From: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>
To: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - DE/Germany - MiniMD)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>, Henning Schulzrinne <schulzrinne@cs.columbia.edu>, John B Morris <jmorris@cdt.org>, Jorge Cuellar <Jorge.Cuellar@siemens.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Sep 2007 13:52:47.0005 (UTC) FILETIME=[303964D0:01C7FEB2]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 20f22c03b5c66958bff5ef54fcda6e48
Cc: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, geopriv@ietf.org
Subject: [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Hannes, Yes, I am satisfied with your answers. For the record, they were as much for curiosity as for anything else - given that my summary indicated the draft is ready to publish... Thanks! -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - DE/Germany - MiniMD) > [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com] > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 6:13 AM > To: Eric Gray; Henning Schulzrinne; John B Morris; Jorge > Cuellar; General Area Review Team > Cc: Cullen Jennings (fluffy); geopriv@ietf.org > Subject: AW: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt > Importance: High > > Hi Eric, > > thank you for your Gen-Art review of the geolocation policy document. > A few minor comments below: > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: ext Eric Gray [mailto:eric.gray@ericsson.com] > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 20. September 2007 21:11 > > An: Henning Schulzrinne; Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - DE/Germany > > - MiniMD); John B Morris; Jorge Cuellar; General Area Review Team > > Cc: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) > > Betreff: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt > > > > > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for > > draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt > > > > For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > > <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>. > > > > Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you may > > receive. > > > > Document: draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-12.txt > > > > Summary: This draft is essentially ready for publication. > > > > Comments/Questions: > > ================== > > > > The last sentence in the introduction (last sentence on > page 5): where > > do the authors anticipate actions will be defined? Same > question also > > would apply to section 5. > > The Common Policy framework does not require that every > extension defines child elements for > * actions > * conditions, and > * transformations > > When actions are not relevant for a particular problem space > then they can be omitted. We believe it is the case for this > document. > > When this document is used in the context and in combination > with the presence authorization policies then the actions > defined in the presence authorization policy document would > be found in a specific rule. > > For the presence authorization policy document please look at: > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/simple/draft-ietf-simple-presence-rules/ > > Does this answer your question? > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > _________ > > > > In the next-to-last paragraph in section 4.1 (on page 10), > there is an > > interesting (and interestingly confusing) discussion of a > possibility > > of supporting co-planar (but not necessarily constant > altitude) and/or > > nearly co-planar location polygons - which is then > > (apparently) negated > > in the last sentence. Is it the intention - behind saying > > "two polygon > > forms are permitted" - to assert that all other polygon > forms are "not > > permitted" (i.e. - disallowed/forbidden)? If that is the case, this > > paragraph could probably be simplified. I would suggest > > something like: > > > > In order for the notion of a location that is defined as within a > > specific polygon to make sense, points specified for the polygon > > MUST be coplanar. To avoid implementation complexity, only two > > polygon forms are permitted: polygons specified using EPSG 4326, > > and polygons specified using EPSG 4979 with a constant altitude > > value. > > We took the current text from the following OGC document > > Thomson, M. and C. Reed, "GML 3.1.1 PIDF-LO Shape Application > Schema for use by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)", > Candidate OpenGIS Implementation Specification > 06-142, Version: > 0.0.9, December 2006. > > that is also used for other GEOPRIV documents, such as > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo -profile-08.txt > > We just wanted to make sure that there is no contradiction > between this work and the rest of the GEOPRIV work. > > Still, your proposal sounds good to me. The difference > between your text and the text from the OGC document is only > that the current text indicates that an implementation may > accept altitude values with a different height. > > Based on the current discussions I got the impression that we > are going to delete the altitude issue and hence this problem > might go away automatically. > > > > > It is then possible to consider whether or not it makes sense > > to retain: > > > > However, implementations SHOULD be prepared to accept small > > variations > > that might occur depending on whether the the polygon is > > specified on > > > > a plane in space, or only relative to the ellipsoid. > > > Correct. > > > > > NITs: > > ==== > > > > Towards the bottom of page 4, "evalation" should be > > "evaluation"... > Thanks. > > > _______________________________________________ > __________ > > ______________ > > > > In section 12 (Security Considerations), there is what appears to be > > an extra closing paren at the end of the next-to-last sentence. > > Correct. Thanks. > > Ciao > Hannes > > > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-enum-valid… Suresh Krishnan
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-po… Eric Gray
- [Gen-art] AW: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopri… Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - DE/Germany - MiniMD)
- [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopri… Eric Gray
- [Gen-art] AW: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopri… Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - DE/Germany - MiniMD)