[Geopriv] geopriv-arch AUTH48

[Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]>]

draft-ietf-geopriv-arch-03 is in AUTH48 and the authors have suggested a slight change to some normative language in section 4.2.4. Here is the section:

An LS that receives Rules exclusively through LOs MUST examine the
   Rules that accompany a given LO in order to determine how the LS may
   use the LO (if any Rules are included by reference, the LS SHOULD
   attempt to download them).  If the LO includes no Rules that allow
   the LS to transmit the LO to another entity, then the LS MUST NOT
   transmit the LO.  If the LO contains no Rules at all (if it is in a
   format with no Rules syntax, for example), then the LS MUST delete it
   (emergency services provide an exception in that Rules can be
   implicit; see [15]).  If the LO included Rules by reference, but
   these Rules were not obtained for any reason, the LS MUST NOT
   transmit the LO and MUST delete it.

Here is the suggested change:

OLD:
If the LO included Rules by reference, but
 these Rules were not obtained for any reason, the LS MUST NOT
 transmit the LO and MUST delete it.

NEW:
If the LO included Rules by reference, but
these Rules were not obtained for any reason, the LS MUST NOT
transmit the LO and MUST adere to the provided value in the retention-expires field.

The change has been proposed to clarify that 
a) if the LS does not want to re-transmit location information then it does not immediately have to delete 
the received location object but instead looks at the retention-expires field only.
b) if the LS wants to transmit location information it is not allowed to do so. The retention-expires field would also give guidance on how long it is permitted to keep the location.

Since this is a change to normative language, if folks have objections to it we're requesting that they send them to the list by next Wednesday, July 13.

Thanks,
Alissa