Subject: [Ecrit] Subscription Concept for Hiding (partial) locations

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:30:09 +0200

Hi all

would folks be happy with the following exchange:

UA <-> DHCP: URI to LIS
UA --> LIS: Subscribe to LbyR+Dial String+PSAP URI
UA <-- LIS: Notification

Ciao
Hannes

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:11:52 -0400

> would folks be happy with the following exchange:

DHCP or SIP configuration, yes.

> UA --> LIS: Subscribe to LbyR+Dial String+PSAP URI

This would be a new protocol, as no current proposal supports that. I  
thought one of the consensus calls in Prague was not to abuse HTTP  
into a event notification protocol, for example.

> UA <-- LIS: Notification

Again, this is the SIP configuration model. Since the notification  
protocol is, by definition, going to be a particular protocol, you  
are either going to create a wholly new event notification  
architecture that is neither XMPP nor SIP, or use SIP (or XMPP),  
which then makes it ill-suited for native speakers of other  
protocols. We've had this problem before, in the context of using SIP  
as LCP (I have a semi-stale draft on that, if you like...), where  
there was protest based on "I don't speak SIP and don't want to  
implement SIP just to get location information". I'm sure if we pick  
XMPP, say, we'd get the same complaint from the SIP crowd.

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 21:10:42 +0200

Hi Henning,

I know that this is not ideal either. Yes; I had the LocationRef 
mechanism in mind.

Ciao
Hannes

Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> protocol is, by definition, going to be a particular protocol, you are 
> either going to create a wholly new event notification architecture 
> that is neither XMPP nor SIP, or use SIP (or XMPP), which then makes 
> it ill-suited for native speakers of other protocols. We've had this 
> problem before, in the context of using SIP as LCP (I have a 
> semi-stale draft on that, if you like...), where there was protest 
> based on "I don't speak SIP and don't want to implement SIP just to 
> get location information". I'm sure if we pick XMPP, say, we'd get the 
> same complaint from the SIP crowd.
>
>>
>> Ciao
>> Hannes
>>
>>