Subject: [Ecrit] [issue2] Is it allowed to specify civic and geospatial info into the query?

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 21:01:26 +0000

Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]> added the comment:

TENTATIVE SUMMARY:

I think the long discussion did not lead to a conclusion. 
Here is the current discussion status: 

* Either civic OR geospatial in a LoST query 

Marc, Henning, Shida

* Both civic AND geospatial possible in a LoST query 

Roger, Martin, Andy, 

These folks don't seem to take a position:

James W., John Hearty, Jean-Francois, Brian

Looks like a hard issue to resolve. If someone has suggestions how we can bring 
a few facts into the discussion.

__________________________________________________
LoST Issue Tracker <[email-masked]>
<http://www.tschofenig.priv.at:8080/lost/issue2>
__________________________________________________

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

---

From: John Schnizlein <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 17:12:07 -0400

That both civic and geospatial are possible in a LoST query is 
perfectly compatible with either one or the other is a LoST query.  The 
simple resolution is to send two queries - one for each.

For that matter, if the host has multiple location values, for example 
(but not limited to) different sets of civil attributes, from different 
sources, there should be no problem with it making LoST queries for 
each of them (one at a time) and including the results in its decision 
as to which PSAP to alert.  The one-at-a-time method avoids 
complication in the LoST protocol as well as the risk that the LoST 
server might attempt (inappropriately) to decide which is best for the 
client.

John

---

From: Byron Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 22:47:37 -0400

I want to support John.  And add my vote that if you wish, nothing keeps 
you can make multiple queries.  But one at a time. 

This keeps the communications protocol simple. It keeps the 
server-service simple.

Note that it doesn't preclude making two, three, or even ten queries, if 
you are so inclined. (Though the reason for wanting to do so isn't clear 
to my simple mind.) 

And, if you want to make it complicated, to decide between civil vs geo 
vs handset vs network vs SWAG, and calculate a weighty medium between 
all the answers, well, then you can do so.  At the client.  You are not 
constrained by any preexisting algorithm or value system or artificial 
expert coded into the server.

Modular / flexible = good.  Monolithic / rigid = bad.

Byron

John Schnizlein wrote:
> perfectly compatible with either one or the other is a LoST query.  
> The simple resolution is to send two queries - one for each.
>
> (but not limited to) different sets of civil attributes, from 
> different sources, there should be no problem with it making LoST 
> queries for each of them (one at a time) and including the results in 
> its decision as to which PSAP to alert.  The one-at-a-time method 
> avoids complication in the LoST protocol as well as the risk that the 
> LoST server might attempt (inappropriately) to decide which is best 
> for the client.
>
> John
>

---

From: Brian Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 01:23:46 -0400

I am with Marc, only send one.