Regarding the XCAP reference...
As Hannes has been saying, if you choose to use the access control or authorization policy model for location by reference, you need more than what this document is providing.
I can imagine that one way this works is:
1. You acquire a location URI using DHCP.
2. You establish authorization rules that the LS applies in relation to this location URI.
3. You convey that location URI to potential location recipients.
I think that we are almost there one 1. And 3. There are mechanisms that exist for 2. That's where XCAP comes in. However, you need a way to tie these together. You can't just say "use XCAP". You need to describe which XCAP profile to use, which base URI to use.
Without that additional information, this can't be deployed. It's an academic exercise only.
Once that issue is resolved, I think that we're a lot closer. I do have some potential concerns, however.
_Different URIs - implementation_
You state that each individual client receives a different URI. This is necessary for your selected model and I'm glad that you've considered the residential case.
I am interested in how you imagine that this might be implemented in the residential case. Do devices within a residence rely on the residential gateway to provide the URI? If different URIs are required, how does the gateway mint these URIs or does it acquire them from some sort of upstream service?
--Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
