Agree that 3825 doesn't have the ability to express uncertainty and
confidence. I don't wish to enhance it to do so at this time.
However, a triangulated WiFi location may have sufficiently low uncertainty
that it could be used for many purposes, including emergency calling,
without reporting what the actual uncertainty was.
In order to actually be useful if the endpoint was mobile, the endpoint
would have to implement a location update, since only it can requery DHCP to
get a new location. The device that does the triangulation may not be
connected to the DHCP infrastructure. In these circumstances, HELD may be a
better choice
Also, the most common initial deployments of WiFi will be that the clients
of an AP are given the location of the AP they are connected to as their
location, and that will often be civic. RFC4776 would work well there. I
expect that will be a very common deployment model.
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Dawson, Martin [mailto:Martin(_dot_)Dawson(_at_)andrew(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 9:03 AM
To: Brian E Carpenter; Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: Brian Rosen; GEOPRIV WG; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Allison Mankin; John
Schnizlein
Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Confirmation of GEOPRIV IETF 68 Working Group Hums
3825 can actually only represent uncertainty to the extent that it can
be conveyed by precision. This makes it unsuitable for the sort of
arbitrary uncertainty around arbitrary location values you refer to.
Cheers,
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, 20 April 2007 10:59 PM
To: Hannes Tschofenig
Cc: Brian Rosen; 'GEOPRIV WG'; Dawson, Martin; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
'Allison
Mankin'; 'John Schnizlein'
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Confirmation of GEOPRIV IETF 68 Working Group
Hums
On 2007-04-20 09:21, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
DHCP is not a great choice in a mobile environment and also not when
it
comes to more complex location representations.
Why can't a mobile system have a locally valid DHCP record (+/- the
length
of a wireless link)? For that matter, why couldn't a DHCP server have
real-time triangulation data, if it exists at all?
Do you mean more complex than can be expressed by RFC 4776 and RFC 3825
together?
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
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]
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf