Subject: [Simple] Vehicle Info Event Package Draft

From: Vishal Kumar Singh <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 19:46:59 -0500

Hello All,

We have submitted a new Internet-draft:
Vehicle Info Event Package
The draft is available at:
http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~vs2140/presence/vehicle-info/draft-singh-simple-vehicle-info-00.txt

Please find the abstract below:

This document defines a new SIP event package for updating and 
retrieving status information of vehicles.  The information can 
include the vehicle's status and diagnostic information distributed by 
vehicle telematics systems.  This event package is useful for fleet 
management and vehicle tracking applications.  The event package is 
called as vehicle-info event package and is applicable to all types of 
vehicles like cars, buses, ships and air crafts. However, this document 
focuses on automobiles.

Please send your comments.

Regards,
Vishal
-- 
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that 
counts can be counted.
-By Albert Einstein

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

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:55:24 +0100

RFC 3265 includes text intended to guide potential event package 
designers with regards to what *kind* of things are appropriate for SIP 
event packages, and what *kind* of things are not. Section 4.4 gives two 
specific examples meant to illustrate types of information that are far 
outside the realm of appropriateness. Specifically:

   When designing an event package using the methods described in this
   document for event notification, it is important to consider:  is SIP
   an appropriate mechanism for the problem set?  Is SIP being selected
   because of some unique feature provided by the protocol (e.g., user
   mobility), or merely because "it can be done?"  If you find yourself
   defining event packages for notifications related to, for example,
   network management or the temperature inside your car's engine, you
   may want to reconsider your selection of protocols.

Given the foregoing, I am a bit perplexed by the proposal on the table, 
which seems to have taken this section of RFC 3265 as a challenge rather 
than as guidance:

  <obdii RTData="EngineCoolantTemp" unit="F">20</obdii>

/a