I would like to conclude the responseTime discussion and close an open
issue with the current document. For this purpose, I need your feedback.
Here are the issues I can see:
1) REFERENCE TO SIPCORE-EVENT-RATE-CONTROL
Based on the suggestion by Martin some time back I removed any reference
to sipcore-event-rate-control.
sipcore-event-rate-control is only be needed if we want functionality
like
-- "Send me location updates with a minimum time
period between two notifications".
-- "Send me location updates with a maximum time period
between two notifications."
Currently, we make the notifications dependent on the degree of location
change.
Do we really need the functionality defined in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sipcore-event-rate-control-00 for
this document?
2) RESPONSETIME ATTRIBUTE
This has triggered some discussion and my current understanding (and I
was not at the IETF meeting and hence did not participate in the
hall-way conversations etc. etc.) is the following:
Martin does not like 'responseTime' to be an XML attribute of the
<locationType> element. Fine. Not a big issue.
How are notifications sent when someone sets
responseTime="emergencyRouting" or responseTime="emergencyDispatch" but
the LIS is unable to provide the requested location immediately (which
is quite likely in many environments)?
Here is a figure:
Location
Recipient LIS
|-----SUBSCRIBE---->| Request state subscription
|<-------200--------| Acknowledge subscription
|<------NOTIFY-(1)- | Return current state information
|--------200------->|
|<------NOTIFY-(2)- | Return current state information
|--------200------->|
My reading of RFC 3265 is that a SIP NOTIFY (1) is sent immediately in
response to the initial SUBSCRIBE and may contain an empty body.
Then, when location is available (as desired) another NOTIFY (2) is
sent. This then contains the desired answer.
Why aren't we happy with this behavior?
We could obviously make this behavior more explict in the document.
3) NUMERICAL VALUES IN RESPONSETIME
The labels "emergencyRouting" and "emergencyDispatch" make a lot of
sense for our purpose. When it comes to the numerical values I am less
clear whether we need them in the loc-filters document. Here is the text
from the HELD document (Section 6.1 of
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery-15.txt)
:
The "responseTime" attribute includes a time value
indicating to the LIS how long the Device is prepared to wait for a
response or a purpose for which the Device needs the location.
So, do we need this functionality?
Ciao
Hannes
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
