Subject: RE: [Simple] PUBLISH: Facet header needed?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:34:49 +0200

Hi,

I think the policies should be preferably managed using the Data Manipulation mechanisms. The need for Facet type of header can only be known after the DM solution has been clarified, but at least I don't see specific need for it at the moment. However, the requirement expressed in the draft

   18.  The presence publication architecture must support a means for
        principals to authorize the disclosure of segments of presence
        information to particular watchers.

is still valid, at least as long as the DM solution is not finalized.

Markus 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Peterson, Jon [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 14 February, 2003 02:21
> To: Simpletons (E-mail)
> Subject: [Simple] PUBLISH: Facet header needed?
> 
> 
> 
> It has been argued that the Facet header of the PUBLISH method is
> superfluous. Facet describes "the intended destination or 
> grouping of event
> state from the publishers point of view" in order to allow 
> the compositor to
> apply per-destination policies to published presence 
> information. However,
> the Data Manipulation Requirements draft also 
> (draft-ietf-simple-data-req)
> outlines a mechanism for establishing user policies about 
> what information
> various subscribers should receive. So Facet provides a 
> similar service, and
> it has been argued that the only real difference is that 
> Facet specifies
> these policies at publication time. 
> 
> Anyone feel strongly that we need Facet?
> 
> Jon Peterson
> NeuStar, Inc.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Simple mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
> 
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple