Re: [Sip] RE: [Geopriv] Location header name collides with HTTP

From: Jeroen van Bemmel ^lt;>
Date: Wed Aug 02 2006 - 11:32:58 EDT

Suggestion: "Location-Object"


> James is on vacation, so I want to wait until he returns but I agree with
> you. Would "Geolocation" be acceptable? It does sometimes make you think
> we
> only mean lat/lon, instead of also allowing street address, but it's
> technically accurate.
> Brian
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Henning Schulzrinne []
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 11:19 AM
>> To: SIP working group; GEOPRIV working group
>> Subject: [Geopriv] Location header name collides with HTTP
>> Just to throw another curveball:
>> I don't know why nobody has noticed this before, but the definition of
>> Location in draft-ietf-sip-location-conveyance-03 directly conflicts
>> with the HTTP usage of the same header name (section 14.30 of RFC 2616).
>> While the two name spaces are nominally different, I think it is a
>> fundamentally bad idea to collide with the HTTP name space and re-use
>> the same header name for dramatically different content. (Among other
>> reasons, we might want to use the same (geo/civic) location mechanism in
>> RTSP or even HTTP later, and it would be really confusing to have
>> different names in each protocol.)
>> Since there's no shortage of English words, this should be changed.
>> By the way, we had this discussion early on in SIP, yielding the Contact
>> header (instead of, as it happens, Location, although the concepts were
>> much closer).
>> For some reason, HTTP seems to have survived without disallowing the
>> "fax" URI scheme...
>> Henning
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geopriv mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> Use for questions on current sip
> Use for new developments on the application of sip

Geopriv mailing list
Received on Wed, 2 Aug 2006 17:32:58 +0200

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 02 2006 - 11:56:36 EDT