retransmission-allowed is going to be ignored in countries where there are
explicit regulations on handling location. In the example given, all of the
responders will get location regardless of the state of retransmission
allowed. It will also be logged.
A better example is a call for pizza, which is forwarded to the closest
pizza shop. If retransmision-allowed is set to no, the pizza shop won't get
location.
Brian
On 9/18/09 2:20 AM, "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)"
<hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com> wrote:
> James,
>
>
>> Dan
>>
>> To you #1 - it's hard to argue this isn't a breach, given the
>> scenario you define. This is a bit of a sticky spot IMO, wrt
>> this spec, if it is answered by a true destination, and not
>> just a clearing house such as a PSAP that dispatches each of
>> these different responders.
>
> So, what is your answer: With retransmission-allowed being set to 'no' is
> entity X allowed to forward it to entity Y? (ignoring the legal aspects for a
> moment)
>
> Based on what criteria should a computer program make the distinction.
>
> Ciao
> Hannes
>
>
>>
>> I do not believe it is a problem for practical matters,
>> because you want the caller's PIDF-LO to be sent to all
>> responders necessary - which goes to your #2, not exactly that
>> there is no expectation of privacy, but that the caller is
>> freely asking for someone to listen to the information
>> (including their location) they are providing in a time of need.
>>
>> James
>>
>> At 11:00 AM 9/17/2009, Dan Mongrain wrote:
>>> I have just read RFC 5606 regarding using
>>> <retransmission-allowed> and have a question
>>> when used in an emergency calling situation.
>>>
>>> An emergency call is made and the PSAP answering
>>> the call is operated by the police
>>> department. It is determined that police, fire
>>> and ambulance are required to be
>>> dispatched. The fire department and the
>>> ambulance company can be deemed as separate
>>> parties from the police department (the
>>> ambulance company can be a private company).
>>>
>>> 1. If the <retransmission-allowed> flag is set
>>> to no, is forwarding the PIDF-LO onto both fire
>>> and ambulance a breach of the use of the flag?
>>> 2. The RFC implies that the LR must respect the
>>> flag only if it has a legal obligation to do
>>> so. Can it be assume that because a caller has
>>> no reasonable expectation to privacy when making
>>> an emergency call (at least in North America)
>>> then forwarding of the PIDF-LO is allowed?
>>>
>>> Thanx,
>>>
>>> Dan Mongrain, ing.
>>> Ingénieur système
>>> Systems Engineer
>>>
>>> dmongrain@plantcml.com
>>>
>>> 75 boul. de la Technologie
>>> Gatineau, QC J8Z 3G4
>>> OFFICE 819.778.2053
>>> DIRECT 819.776.7906
>>> FAX 819.772.8905
>>> MOBILE 819.712.0491
>>> www.plantcml.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
