IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sipcore] geo URI and conveyance: conclusion?

"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Mon, 26 July 2010 16:02 UTC

Return-Path: <jmpolk@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05CFB3A6948 for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.545
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.545 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GqsamK7HGtcb for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0BCA3A6880 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,262,1278288000"; d="scan'208";a="139324253"
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Jul 2010 16:02:54 +0000
Received: from jmpolk-wxp01.cisco.com (dhcp-10-61-108-57.cisco.com [10.61.108.57]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6QG2rhx002347; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:02:54 GMT
Message-Id: <201007261602.o6QG2rhx002347@rtp-core-2.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:02:53 -0500
To: "Richard L. Barnes" <rbarnes@bbn.com>, "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E53B9D4B-F8B6-4643-91A2-DDC471D957F8@bbn.com>
References: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB77364D@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <201007261510.o6QFAaa3010310@rtp-core-2.cisco.com> <E53B9D4B-F8B6-4643-91A2-DDC471D957F8@bbn.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@nic.at>, "sipcore@ietf.org" <sipcore@ietf.org>, "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
Subject: Re: [sipcore] geo URI and conveyance: conclusion?
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:02:35 -0000

I'm not fighting you, but that's not how I remember the exchange 
between Jon and Adam.

james

At 10:47 AM 7/26/2010, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
>I wouldn't say it was explicitly ruled out.  We just noticed that it
>was inconsistent with the requirements RFC 3693/5808 in this context.
>What we're discussing now is how to make GEO URIs satisfy those
>requirements.
>
>
>
>On Jul 26, 2010, at 5:10 PM, James M. Polk wrote:
>
>>At 08:28 AM 7/26/2010, Thomson, Martin wrote:
>>>I missed the conclusions regarding geo URI.  I got the bit where we
>>>decided that we needed to have _some_ text, but I'm not sure what
>>>we decided what the text might look like.
>>>
>>>Help me?
>>
>>I believe the agreement in the room was to explicitly avoid it
>>(i.e., "MUST NOT appear in the Geolocation header value (i.e.,
>>locationValue)"). As it's too close to being a data-URL (per Adam).
>>
>>James
>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>sipcore mailing list
>>>sipcore@ietf.org
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>sipcore mailing list
>>sipcore@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status