Re: [Geopriv] [Ecrit] Announce: Specifying Derived Location inaPIDF-LO

From: Roger Marshall ^lt;RMarshall@telecomsys.com>
Date: Wed Jul 30 2008 - 06:05:22 EDT

Yes, I'm an advocate of a linking mechanism. Though I'm not sure that
it needs to be as general as Brian suggests.

-roger.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org
> [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Winterbottom, James
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 5:19 PM
> To: Brian Rosen; Hannes Tschofenig; James M. Polk
> Cc: geopriv@ietf.org; ecrit@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] [Ecrit] Announce: Specifying Derived
> Location inaPIDF-LO
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Thanks for the constructive input.
> I do think that we need to determine if this is something
> that people think is generally worthwhile doing. I am hearing
> one resounding no, and at least one saying they would prefer
> that derived locations didn't happen but if they are going to
> then it is better we can see where they came from.
>
> So before we decide to make a generic solution for any
> linking between any PIDF elements, can we have a clear yes or
> no whether people want a linkage mechanism. If we decide we
> want to do this, then we have to decide where to do it,
> ECRIT, GEOPRIV, or SIMPLE (since this is the organization
> that owns PIDF).
>
> Cheers
> James
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2008 8:22 AM
> > To: Winterbottom, James; 'Hannes Tschofenig'; 'James M. Polk'
> > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org; ecrit@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [Ecrit] [Geopriv] Announce: Specifying Derived Location
> in
> > aPIDF-LO
> >
> > If you were generalizing it:
> > 1. You would want some more generalized id I think. Perhaps that is
> what
> > you have, but I don't really see it so far. Specifically, it has to
> be
> > unique across PIDFs/XML documents/message bodies. A GUID might be
> > appropriate
> >
> > 2. You want to specify the relationship. "Derived from" is one
> > relationship. "Same target, different time" is another.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Winterbottom, James [mailto:James.Winterbottom@andrew.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 5:41 PM
> > > To: Brian Rosen; Hannes Tschofenig; James M. Polk
> > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org; ecrit@ietf.org
> > > Subject: RE: [Ecrit] [Geopriv] Announce: Specifying
> Derived Location
> in
> > > aPIDF-LO
> > >
> > > To be clear, this is expressing a relationship between any two
> things
> > that
> > > have an XML <id> attribute.
> > > The draft shows how this can be done to link two location chunks
> > providing
> > > the location chunks follow the rules laid out in PIDF-LO profile.
> > >
> > > Derived from is one way this can be used.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > James
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ecrit-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of Brian Rosen
> > > Sent: Tue 7/29/2008 10:39 AM
> > > To: 'Hannes Tschofenig'; 'James M. Polk'
> > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org; ecrit@ietf.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Ecrit] [Geopriv] Announce: Specifying
> Derived Location
> in
> > > aPIDF-LO
> > >
> > > Actually, no.
> > >
> > > All you need to specify that a location is derived is to have the
> method
> > > token set to derived.
> > >
> > > James thinks there is value in linking the derived PIDF to the
> original
> > > PIDF.
> > >
> > > That is a separate question.
> > >
> > > I think there is some merit in the basic idea of linking.
> > >
> > > I wonder if this is a specific case of a more general notion:
> expressing
> > a
> > > relationship between two PIDFs?
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org]
> On
> > > Behalf
> > > > Of Hannes Tschofenig
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 9:26 AM
> > > > To: James M. Polk
> > > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org; ecrit@ietf.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Geopriv] [Ecrit] Announce: Specifying Derived
> Location
> > in
> > > a
> > > > PIDF-LO
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> I also though that location information was generally only
> going be
> > > > >> sent if TLS was used, which would rule out the use
> of UDP as a
> > viable
> > > > >> transport wouldn't it? Certainly I would be uncomfortable
> sending
> > my
> > > > >> location in an unencrypted UDP packet as I hardly think that
> that
> > > > >> meets the general requirements of a using protocol.
> > > > >
> > > > > James, YOU keep making these points as if everyone has YOUR
> values
> > and
> > > > > uses protocols only YOUR way. Are you (as a single entity)
> > > > > representative of the entire human race?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure why you guys are arguing around on this issue.
> > > >
> > > > * We know that location information is encoded in XML and not
> > > > particularly small.
> > > > * We also know that there are security issues with passing
> location
> > > > information around. Hence, we use security protocols.
> > > >
> > > > What we should think about is whether it makes sense to indicate
> that
> > > > location was derived. If you want to indicate that location was
> > derived
> > > > then there is the question on how to express that fact.
> > > >
> > > > Ciao
> > > > Hannes
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Geopriv mailing list
> > > > Geopriv@ietf.org
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ecrit mailing list
> > > Ecrit@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> > >
> > >
> > >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> > --
> > > ----------------------
> > > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > > privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
> > > If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> > > immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized
> use of this
> > > email is prohibited.
> > >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> > --
> > > ----------------------
> > > [mf2]
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------
> This message is for the designated recipient only and may
> contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
> If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
> this email is prohibited.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------
> [mf2]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, any review, forwarding, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication or any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete it and all attachments from your computer and network.

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:05:22 -0700

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jul 30 2008 - 06:11:36 EDT