Subject: [Ecrit] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-ecrit-held-routing-04: (with COMMENT)

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 18:39:45 -0800

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ecrit-held-routing-04: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ecrit-held-routing/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There is some confusion about whether this draft updates 6881. The
headers and section 5 say it does, but the abstract does not. (Since the
abstract _does_ mention 5985, I assume the authors intended to follow the
convention of mentioning such things in the abstract.)

It would be nice to have a sentence or two on why some countries are
reluctant to deploy public LoST servers. (I recognize there may be too
many worms in that can, so feel free to ignore.)

- section 5, 2nd paragraph:
I don't understand the 2nd sentence. It seems like this updates 6881 or
it doesn't.

---

From: James Winterbottom <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 19:39:41 +1100

Thanks Ben,

[AJW] I have clarified this, I hope, by adding the following sentence to the end of the abstract:

“Allowing location and routing information to be acquired in a single request response exchange requires updates to RFC6881,  as current location acquisition and route determination 
 procedures are separate operations."

> many worms in that can, so feel free to ignore.)
[AJW] Are you looking for bait to go fishing with? In the conversations I have been involved in the blunt line is “we are not going to do it”. The reality, I think, are commercial and competition related. I would rather not add this to the document unless there are strong reasons for doing so.

> it doesn’t.
[AJW] Agree, this was not very readable at all.

Old : "In absence of global forest guides or local LoST servers and the possibility that the local network may be configured with PSAP address information, this specification updates Phone BCP [RFC6881]”.

Proposed: "An alternative to providing routing information via global forest guides or local LoST servers is for local networks to configure the PSAP address  information in the network location server. This specification updates Phone BCP [RFC6881] to provide this option.

Cheers
James

---

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 08:54:59 -0600

On 4 Feb 2016, at 2:39, James Winterbottom wrote:

[...]

> [AJW] Are you looking for bait to go fishing with? In the 
> conversations I have been involved in the blunt line is “we are not 
> going to do it”. The reality, I think, are commercial and 
> competition related. I would rather not add this to the document 
> unless there are strong reasons for doing so.

Yeah, okay. I guess I'm just picking at old wounds hoping something 
different comes up :-)

> Old : "In absence of global forest guides or local LoST servers and 
> the possibility that the local network may be configured with PSAP 
> address information, this specification updates Phone BCP 
> [RFC6881]”.
>
> Proposed: "An alternative to providing routing information via global 
> forest guides or local LoST servers is for local networks to configure 
> the PSAP address  information in the network location server. This 
> specification updates Phone BCP [RFC6881] to provide this option.
>

That works for me.

Thanks!

Ben.

---

From: James Winterbottom <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:35:20 +1100

Hi All,

I have revised the held-routing draft with all of the comments made.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ecrit-held-routing-05 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ecrit-held-routing-05>

Please let me know if you think I have missed anything.

Cheers
James