Re: [Simple] Comments on draft-thomson-simple-cont-presence-val-req-00

Thanks Cullen,

All good suggestions.  I'll try to work out how to get them into the next revision.

I do have an example that is similar, but a little less...immediate.  I did some reading on the methods used to measure sulphur levels in petroleum - interesting stuff and subject to all the same constraints as here.  The temperature example has a better ring to it though.

Cheers,
Martin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cullen Jennings [mailto:fluffy@cisco.com]
> Sent: Saturday, 15 November 2008 4:49 PM
> To: simple@ietf.org
> Cc: Thomson, Martin
> Subject: Comments on draft-thomson-simple-cont-presence-val-req-00
> 
> 
> I really liked this draft and hope that we proceed with solutions to
> some to these requirements.
> 
> One small thing, I think an example might help illustrate all the
> issues. I was trying to think of an example that illustrates many of
> the problems yet is not too complicated or too tied up in other
> controversial issues. Location seemed to complicated though it is
> probably the most important use case. The example that came to mind
> was imagine my communication device could measure my body temperature.
> This information is privacy sensitive, associated with user more
> though measured by device, continuous. It easy to imagine a sensor
> that could be within a 2 degree error in an almost instantaneously
> measurement seconds but needed to integrate for 45 seconds to get down
> to 0.0 degree error.  (Yah, yah, I know error is a big vague but
> forgive me that for now). It's easy to imagine some applications where
> 1 degree is fine and there are others where one needs to be at the 0.1
> degree level. One could have applications that wanted to be notified
> if it went below 96 degrees fahrenheit or over 101 degrees. It easy to
> imagine applications that want it report once an hour.
> 
> The value based trigger section does not discuss the difficulties of
> how noisy measurement randomly bouncing above and below the threshold
> but this seems like it is often one of the issues.
> 
> On requirement V1. As you know, specifying ranges of multivariate
> values can get complicated. For multivariate values, I think it wold
> be sufficient to have an scheme where a min max value for for each
> variable was specified and any time any variable crossed one of these
> thresholds, an update was triggered.
> 
> 
> Cullen in my individual contributor role
> 
> PS - This was a really nicely written draft. I read just about ever
> draft that was on a RAI agenda and this was probably the most coherent
> easy to understand draft I read. Thanks

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple