Re: [sipcore] Questions on location conveyance and dereferencing

We are talking at cross purposes. If a location recipient receives through SIP location conveyance an LbyR with a scheme he is unable to dereference, how can he request LbyV instead?

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net] 
> Sent: 23 August 2010 09:38
> To: Elwell, John; Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo); ext 
> Winterbottom, James; sipcore@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [sipcore] Questions on location conveyance and 
> dereferencing
> 
> I would use the following HELD request: 
> 
>          <locationRequest xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:geopriv:held">
>           <locationType exact="true">
>             geodetic
>             civic
>           </locationType>
>           </locationRequest>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ciao
> 
> Hannes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -----
> 
> 	Von: Elwell, John
> 
> 	Gesendet: 23.08.10 11:30 Uhr
> 
> 	An: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo), ext 
> Winterbottom, James, sipcore@ietf.org
> 
> 	Betreff: Re: [sipcore] Questions on location conveyance 
> and dereferencing
> 
> 
> 	> -----Original Message----- > From: Tschofenig, Hannes 
> (NSN - FI/Espoo)  > [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com]  > 
> Sent: 16 August 2010 07:27 > To: Elwell, John; ext 
> Winterbottom, James; sipcore@ietf.org > Subject: RE: 
> [sipcore] Questions on location conveyance and  > 
> dereferencing >  > Hi John,  >   >  > > > In your enterprise 
> LIS for emergency services you will most  > > > likely want > 
> > > to figure out who is going to consume that reference. 
> Quite  > > likely the > > > PSAP will consume the reference. 
> If so, you better talk  > to the PSAP > > > responsible for 
> that specific area.  > > [JRE] Quite so, except is it likely 
> my VoIP service provider  > > might also want to inspect the 
> location, to confirm correct  > > routing? Then depending on 
> which SP I choose to route that  > > particular call through, 
> they might support different URI  > > schemes? It seems to be 
> a mess not having a MUST implement scheme. >  > I understand 
> the theoretical concern.  > I have no objections against a 
> mandatory to implement HTTP-based > dereferencing mechanism.  
> >  >  > > > XMPP does not provide equivalent functionality of 
> SIP location > > > conveyance.  > > > So, another non-issue.  
> > > [JRE] That was not the point I was making. I was simply  
> > > saying that even applications that support presence might 
>  > > support XMPP rather than SIMPLE, and therefore would not 
> want  > > to implement RFC 3856. Instead they might prefer to 
> use HTTP. > I am not quite sure which scenario you have in 
> mind.  > If I have an end host that supports XMPP and then 
> gets a location URI > then there is the question of who is 
> going to dereference it. If it is > the end point then it 
> would have to implement the protocol  > indicated by > the 
> URI scheme. Now, if this happens to be SIP then this end  > 
> point would > have to implement SIP. The end host could, 
> however, request  > location by > value instead instead of 
> going through the dance of utilizing a LbyR.  [JRE] So how 
> does it request LbyV?  John   > If the end point does not 
> dereference the LbyR but instead some other > entity then 
> there is the question of how this reference then actually > 
> gets there.  >  > Ciao > Hannes >  
> _______________________________________________ sipcore 
> mailing list sipcore@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
> 
> 
> 
> 