RE: AW: [Geopriv] Quickrandomcommentsondraft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-l o -profile-00

Luckily, routing is not dependent on the altitude, floor, sub-floor, or
at least not with the current routing models. The routing of the call is
based firmly in two dimensions. An address -123 Main -, or a coordinate
pair - long, lat - both of which represent a point on the earth.
Supplemental information is often needed by the responders.

3825 is well suited for this supplemental information. Information that
could be very useful the to emergency responders, e.g. "Now I am at 123
Main, but which of the 23 floors did the call come from?"

I'm all for leaving both in and providing all data elements to the PSAP.
Let the PSAP decide which one to base their response on.

Of course I am coming from the Operations side, so I may be missing the
broader picture. 

Marc B

-----Original Message-----
From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of James M. Polk
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 10:32 PM
To: Henning Schulzrinne
Cc: 'GEOPRIV'; Marc Linsner
Subject: Re: AW: [Geopriv]
Quickrandomcommentsondraft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-l o -profile-00

Henning

I wasn't claiming "mine is better", I was just defending 3825 as
suitable, 
when more than one seemed to claim it was not.

I agree we need consensus on what level of precision for each format
needs 
to be present to satisfy certain functions (like routing to a PSAP).
That 
seems like a meaningful discussion - and hopefully a more peaceful one
;-)

At 10:22 PM 7/14/2005 -0400, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
>James M. Polk wrote:
>
>>However, floor names do change, and unless the build falls down, the 
>>number of floors doesn't - so the 3825 definition of the counting of 
>>floors seems the more precise (if that matters here).
>
>I'm not sure what "precise" means here. Also, floors do get added on
occasion.
>
>I don't think this is a discussion that is going to get us very far.
Some 
>people believe that recipients prefer room locations measured in geo
and 
>in fractional floors, others have their doubts as to the practicality
of 
>that. Experience will tell and the discussion seems to be of interest
only 
>to about 4-5 people.
>
>I'd like to avoid needless complexity for the presumably common case
that 
>both exist and would rather avoid the "mine is better" arguments in
making 
>decisions on routability. Both need some degree of specificity to be 
>routable, down to house numbers for civic and probably at least 100' 
>anywhere on the globe for geo (whatever that translates to in terms of
bits).
>
>Henning

cheers,
James

                                 *******************
                 Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented.

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv