Subject: RE: [Ecrit] Issue

From: "Roger Marshall" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:16:32 -0800

Bringing this one back up for discussion in order to resolve the logged
issue.

Issue 15: Validation of civic location

Currently written as:
Lo1.  Validation of civic location: It MUST be possible to 
validate a civic location prior to its use in an actual emergency call.

Motivation: Location validation provides an opportunity to 
help assure ahead of time, whether successful mapping to the 
appropriate PSAP will likely occur when it is required.  Validation may 
also help to avoid delays during emergency call setup due to invalid 
locations.

The following questions were raised from the list, but never resolved...
"Is this a protocol requirement or an architecture requirement?  When
should this validation take place?"

My comment:
This requirement doesn't really say anything about the mapping protocol.
We know that all kinds of things are possible prior to an emergency
call.  Additionally, we know that the mapping protocol should have a
valid location as input to the mapping function in order to be
successful.  Nevertheless, I contend that it is not the job of the MP to
specify this.  If a "non-valid" address is used, it will either map or
not map to a URI, in which case an error will result.  One person's
architecture may take advantage of this fact, always employ validation,
and become more robust than next guy's.

I say that we should delete this requirement, Lo1.  Other comments?

Roger Marshall.

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