[Geopriv] Location header name collides with HTTP

From: Henning Schulzrinne ^lt;hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed Aug 02 2006 - 11:18:57 EDT

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
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:18:57 -0400

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 02 2006 - 11:57:27 EDT