Subject: RE: [Geopriv] draft-winterbottom-location-uri-00

From: "Martin Thomson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:59:46 +1000

If I may add a little more to this argument.  There seems to be a couple of
fundamental concerns, and, as Jon has acknowledged, a fair bit more work
required on this draft before it is mature.

The simplest issue is that of privacy, and whether the by-reference location
affects the GEOPRIV privacy model.  A Location Server must observe the rules
that are set by the rule-maker.  The model does not change, in fact there
are cases where by-reference is superior to by-value (see first paragraph on
page 6 of the draft).

I somewhat agree with Jon's assessment that we need to treat the provision
of location separately to conveyance.  The realization that these are
separate is an important step.  However, conveyance of location by-reference
would be far less useful without provision of the same.  I think that a
revision of this draft could both make the distinction clear and address the
issues about both.

Ta,
Martin

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