Re: [Geopriv] Location in SIP and "retransmission-allowed"

From: Richard Barnes ^lt;>
Date: Tue May 01 2007 - 21:27:44 EDT

> To pursue this one a bit: Let's assume we have this flag. Would the
> definition be "no location-based lookup" at all or only under some
> circumstances, e.g., based on where the server is located?

Once you start expanding the scope, though, where do you draw the line?
  Can it be used to query a location-based rate computation system? Can
it be used to deliver location-targeted ads? Is the telco authorized to
do whatever it wants?

If you want to go that route, maybe we could define an
"allowed-services" element that the user could use to express that the
enclosed LI/LO could be used with particular protocols. LoST would be
the first example, RADIUS might be another, I'm sure more would come up.
  This could be a nice compliment to the identity-based rules in RFC 4745.

> Can we build a new MIME attachment called 'application/lawyer' while
> we're at it, so that we can include an attorney with the call attempt?

I hear that Verizon has claimed IPR on that. :)


> On May 1, 2007, at 8:30 PM, Moore, Lyn E wrote:
>> To pick up on Martin's point. Currently, PSTN location-based routing
>> occurs via SS7 and "phone number to Address" database lookups internal
>> to a telco. I would consider that in a SIP environment that Martin's
>> pizza example would still be carried out as location-based routing
>> "in-bound" calling application within a telco. This could take the form
>> of an IMS Application Server that processes in bound calls to the
>> nearest pizza hut and routes them to the nearest one. Other IMS
>> Application Servers could be used in conjunction to provide the relevant
>> location information in the correct format, all within the telco
>> environment. I assume this will be an "unpopular" point of view.
>> Regards
>> Lyn Moore
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list

Geopriv mailing list
Received on Tue, 01 May 2007 21:27:44 -0400

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 01 2007 - 21:27:53 EDT