Re: [Geopriv] New indoor location - standards needed

Henning Schulzrinne <Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov> Thu, 04 December 2014 19:28 UTC

Return-Path: <Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov>
X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABE91A0173 for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:28:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xe6EqqCkakzH for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:28:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DC-IP-2.fcc.gov (dc-ip-2.fcc.gov [192.104.54.91]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE3D1A010C for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:28:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <E6A16181E5FD2F46B962315BB05962D05BDECD31@fcc.gov>
From: Henning Schulzrinne <Henning.Schulzrinne@fcc.gov>
To: "Rosen, Brian" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz>
Thread-Topic: [Geopriv] New indoor location - standards needed
Thread-Index: AQHQDzAsSV8u/FH9ykm5QZahA6TPVZx+66FIgAE1zYCAAAFXAP//rZpm
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 19:28:28 +0000
References: <D0A4CFA5.68817%mlinsner@cisco.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B28BBA1@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-luc ent.com> <p0624060dd0a5a3cce274@[99.111.97.136]> <51581CA9D0965243B6931E4CDEDF3E4504CFB3A160@lmv08-mx02.corp.intrado.pri>, <0109FDD4-FABA-45DF-9389-E56D58F65E90@neustar.biz>
In-Reply-To: <0109FDD4-FABA-45DF-9389-E56D58F65E90@neustar.biz>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/geopriv/gtBXlUYxyKEHrHPrR04VQfeqy1Y
Cc: geopriv <geopriv@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] New indoor location - standards needed
X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy <geopriv.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv/>
List-Post: <mailto:geopriv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 19:28:35 -0000

I suspect there's a general interest in having standards that are technology-neutral and international, and move with some urgency, whether induced by voluntary commitments or just the sense that the sooner we solve (or reduce) the problem, the sooner people will see improved emergency services.

Also, having specific technology examples may accelerate the work by others, just as (one hopes) the availability of ECRIT and GEOPRIV work simplified and sped up the NENA i3 work.

As far as I can tell, there are (at least) two low-level needs for communication location-related data:

(1) barometric data

(2) Wi-Fi measurement data (visible APs and RSS)

For (1), GML seems to offer some support, namely the "Observation" tag. Copying from GML 3.2.1, for a temperature example:

<gml:Observation>
 <gml:validTime>
 <gml:TimeInstant>
 <gml:timePosition>2002-11-12T09:12:00</gml:timePosition>
 </gml:TimeInstant>
 </gml:validTime>
 <gml:using xlink:href="http://www.my.org/sensors/thermometer4"/>
 <gml:target xlink:href="http://www.environment.org/stations/l456"/>
 <gml:resultOf>
 <gml:Quantity uom="#C">18.4</gml:Quantity>
 </gml:resultOf>
</gml:Observation>


GEOPRIV has discussed solutions for #2, but that discussion seems to have faded a bit.

(I don't see the need to wait for the conclusion of the FCC regulatory process. It's often helpful to have a notion of what's possible and the complications before rules are made, for example. Plus, this is not a US-only problem.)

Henning

________________________________________
From: Geopriv [geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Rosen, Brian [Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 2:15 PM
To: Militeau, Christian
Cc: geopriv; Marc Linsner; DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Randall Gellens
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] New indoor location - standards needed

I see the problem differently.

While mobiles using licensed spectrum are clearly the biggest problem, any device that has a WiFi interface could use this mechanism to get a good location for an emergency call.  It isn’t using anything intrinsic to 3G/4G/5G systems.  It’s not a US-only problem.  Because you are linking multiple, independent networks, you need something like the IETF to do that work.

Brian

> On Dec 4, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Militeau, Christian <Christian.Militeau@intrado.com> wrote:
>
> Randy,
>
> I agree with your assessment. ATIS (along with NENA and APCO) is in the process of initiating planning to support standards development.
> Once ATIS has agreed on something, then it will be more clear on what the IETF needs to do for standards support.
> It is anticipated that there will be communications among SDOs (ATIS, 3GPP, IETF, IEEE, etc.) to discuss the support of a standards development plan and possibly coordination like we have done in the past with the Emergency Services Coordination Group.
>
> Regards,
> Christian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geopriv [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Randall Gellens
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 10:41 PM
> To: geopriv
> Cc: Marc Linsner (mlinsner); DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] New indoor location - standards needed
>
> I agree that there does appear to be standards work that may be needed, with a role for the IETF.  However, before we in the IETF in general or geopriv (or ecrit) in particular jump in with specific proposals, I think we need to understand the requirements and overall architecture.  Since we are discussing protocols to be used with cellular calls, we need to work with the cellular industry to be sure that what we develop meets their needs and will be used.
>
> To my knowledge, there has been very little discussion, much less agreement, by an industry-specific SDO such as ATIS (since we are talking about the U.S.). Once this is done, the objectives for the IETF, as well as industry groups, will become clear.  In addition the FCC has not issued any new mandate as of yet and is still in an NPRM process.
>
> Therefore, I think we need to wait until discussions on the requirements and architecture have further progressed by the industry groups.
>
> --
> Randall Gellens
> Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
> -------------- Randomly selected tag: --------------- There is no unhappiness like the misery of sighting land (and work) again
> after a cheerful, careless voyage.                          -- Mark Twain
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

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