Re: [Geopriv] Items of cross group interest

["James M. Polk" <jmpolk at cisco.com>]

At 03:32 PM 7/18/2008, Brian Rosen wrote:
> I oppose the notion of another event package beyond presence to return a
> PIDF (containing, in this context, a PIDF-LO).

I agree with this, given that this is what we agree to in IETF69 (Chicago).

draft-ietf-geopriv-loc-filters was Rohan's ID that was supposed to 
have died abruptly based on this same Chicago decision, because he 
proposed an alternate event package to Presence, called "Location".

What draft-polk-sip-location-get does is specify how SIP is used to both

- solicit (the opposite of Conveyance) a location from another entity, and
- to dereference a Conveyed locationURI (which is part of Conveyance)

Both functions are done exactly the same way in draft-polk-sip-location-get.

This ID also proposes a set of filters be created to specify which 
pieces of location information an entity (presence watcher, or 
geopriv seeker) wants to learn about another entity's location.

This to me, which is summarized by Brian below, is a combination of 
the functionality of what both Brian's ID (was Rohan's and was 
supposed to have died) and James's IDs, therefore I believe 
draft-polk-sip-location-get should be the one to move forward - since 
it answers the part of Rohan's ID that agrees with the Chicago 
decision (while omitting what the Chicago decision didn't want going 
forward), and the part of James's direction (the set of filters 
specifying some of the different pieces of location information).

At the same time, draft-polk-sip-location-get satisfies both how to 
subscribe to solicit and how to dereference a location URI. Neither 
of the others do both of these, that I have read.

BTW -- draft-ietf-geopriv-loc-filters was never written to be a 
general purpose SIP dereference specification -- which is needed to 
complete the work started in Conveyance (that was there, until the 
Paris meeting actually, when it was split off).

draft-ietf-geopriv-loc-filters is about triggered movement in and out 
of buildings.


> I the only capability draft-winterbottom-sip-location-package-00 offers over
> presence+loc-filters that I can see is the ability to specify the "what",
> i.e. the form of location.  If this is desirable, we can add it to
> loc-filter.
>
> I must confess that I have had a very hard time understanding what
> polk-sip-location-get does.  It appears to define filters for the presence
> package, somewhat like loc-filters, but there are some additions that are
> unclear to me (filter 1 filters on presentities, but unless the subscription
> URI is a list, there is only one presentity, but it doesn't say it's for
> lists, and if it is for lists, why do we need a filter on the list?).  Many
> of the other filters seem to duplicate what is in loc-filters.  There is no
> justification offered for why an alternative to loc-filters is needed.
>
> I think we should continue working on loc-filters, adding a filter for
> "what" and not consider the other proposals.
>
> Brian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: geopriv-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Robert Sparks
> > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 4:07 PM
> > To: GEOPRIV
> > Cc: SIP IETF; sipping LIST
> > Subject: [Geopriv] Items of cross group interest
> >
> > This message is heavily crossposted. It is set to reply-to geopriv.
> > If you manually reply-to, please reply there.
> >
> > There are some questions about how to best provide location for some
> > applications. To date, the answer from GEOPRIV has been to use
> > Presence as defined by SIMPLE and extended by GEOPRIV. (We've spent
> > time arguing that in GEOPRIV more than once).
> >
> > There are some new proposals, perhaps with new information, that push
> > at that answer again, and in some cases, if they move forward, its not
> > clear what the best venue to vet them in is. But we have to start
> > somewhere, and the plan at the moment is to have a framing discussion
> > in GEOPRIV.
> >
> > Please review the following drafts, comment on the GEOPRIV list if you
> > have an opinion, and plan to attend this section of the GEOPRIV
> > meeting if you have an interest in how the conversation turns out.
> >
> > ------
> > Location events/filters
> >             draft-ietf-geopriv-loc-filters-02.txt
> >             draft-winterbottom-sip-location-package-00.txt
> >             draft-polk-sip-location-get-00.txt
> > _______________________________________________
> > Geopriv mailing list
> > Geopriv at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv