Re: AW: [Geopriv] Quickrandomcommentsondraft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo -profile-00

Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu> Fri, 15 July 2005 00:46 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtELk-00029D-M8; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:46:44 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtELi-000295-SN for geopriv@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:46:43 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA25272 for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:46:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from jalapeno.cc.columbia.edu ([128.59.29.5] ident=cu41754) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DtEoQ-0000yN-9j for geopriv@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:16:23 -0400
Received: from [192.168.0.31] (pool-141-153-198-113.mad.east.verizon.net [141.153.198.113]) (user=hgs10 mech=PLAIN bits=0) by jalapeno.cc.columbia.edu (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j6F0kdfk024080 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:46:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <42D70769.2040002@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:46:33 -0400
From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
Organization: Columbia University
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: AW: [Geopriv] Quickrandomcommentsondraft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo -profile-00
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20050714181947.03f02130@email.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20050714181947.03f02130@email.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-No-Spam-Score: Local
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.48 on 128.59.29.5
X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 'GEOPRIV' <geopriv@ietf.org>, Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy <geopriv.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:geopriv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org

Since I'm not sure I understand the question and since partial answers 
may confuse more than help, let me try to explain what I see as the 
process and issues systematically.

The DHCP client wants to get location information and then PUBLISH this 
information via PIDF-LO.

I assume that the DHCP client has no out-of-band knowledge what location 
information, if any, is available locally.

Let's assume that the DHCP client hasn't participated in the 35 geo vs. 
civic discussions on this list and just wants to get all the location 
information it can lay its virtual hands on. I know it's bad form these 
days to be an agnostic, but maybe we can tolerate it in protocols.

The most expedient way is to request both civic and geo options in one 
DHCP request, requesting them by their respective DHCP option numbers.

Let's assume both are available and are returned. (If just one, there's 
no problem except that you'll possibly generate an incomplete civic record.)

The question at hand is what the PIDF should look like, with its 1, 2 or 
3 location objects. (One: combined civic+geo, Two: one each, Three: one 
civic from the geo object, plus the full civic plus the geo object). It 
sure would be nice if we can give an answer which is something other 
than "maybe 1, maybe 2, maybe 3, depending on the weather".

Henning

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