> > In this case, you have a (small) installed base of V0. Any
> > new device or server has to implement both V0 and V1 if
> > there is a possibility of encountering a V0-only end. It's
> > certainly possible to implement V1 only if you allow the
> > possibility of failure. For an emergency system, that would
> > not be an option, but for other use, it might be okay.
>
>The situation is somewhat different on the client and server so we
>need to think this through in somewhat more detail.
>
>My understanding is that it is not possible for an RFC 3825bis
>client to explicitly indicate which version it supports to the
>server. An RFC 3825bis client will include the same option 55
>regardless of the geo-location option version it supports, and for
>11k/11y there is no way for a client to signal the highest supported
>version in the location request. In some cases, v0 and v1 clients
>may be differentiated by OUI or MAC Address, but this cannot be
>assumed. As a result, an RFC 3825bis client cold receive either a
>v0 or a v1 response, and should be prepared to handle either
>version. It is our (so far unverified) assumption that existing RFC
>3825 clients will silently discard a v1 response, but will not
>suffer other ill-effects (e.g. they won't crash and will still be
>able to obtain an IP address and utilize other configuration parameters).
>
>On the server side, the lack of an explicit version indication in
>the request implies that an RFC 3825bis server cannot be assumed to
>know what version a client supports. However, the server's
>configuration can be based on prior knowledge of the expected
>population of v0 and v1 clients.
>
>Where few if any v0 clients are expected, the server can send v1
>responses to all requesters. Where out-of-band differentiation is
>possible, an RFC 3825bis server could send v0 or v1 responses based
>on out-of-band configuration. Where out-of-band configuration is
>not possible and v0 clients need to be supported, the server can
>send v0 responses to all requests.
Bernard -- I think the key word you used above is
"configuration". Do we have a requirement that v0 and v1 can be
configurable, and where is this configuration to occur?
I think the only place we cannot assume configuration is at the 3825
unupgraded client. Therefore, the server within a domain has to be
able to configure what the domain administrator wants to provide by the server.
I believe this is as far as the 3825bis doc can go, and not mandate
v1 or v0 support any more than this. This doc can RECOMMEND all day
long, but I don't believe the bis doc can mandate anything on the
v0/v1 issue. I could be wrong, but I believe v1 server/v0 client is
what we have to allow for if we can.
James
>_______________________________________________
>Geopriv mailing list
>Geopriv@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
