Re: [Ecrit] Hiding (partial) locations

[Henning Schulzrinne <hgs at cs.columbia.edu>]

On Apr 16, 2007, at 11:19 AM, Brian Rosen wrote:

> This doesn't work in areas that don't have simple PSAP boundaries.

Agreed; it would require more precise location in those  
jurisdictions. Those do seem to be the exception, however.

> Even in a case where the PSAP serves a city, the boundary of the  
> city is
> very often not exactly that of the municipal boundary.

Again, this would only force an ISP to provide more precise location  
information to those relative handful of exception cases. This seems  
like a fair trade-off.

> It definitely doesn't work in the U.S. where there are PSAP  
> boundaries that
> are one side or the other of the street (even and odd addresses),  
> or between
> two house numbers on a street.

My perception is that PSAP boundaries that don't correspond to  
community or county names occur, but only affect a tiny fraction of  
the population.

(Street don't matter. Broad Avenue, for example, traverses a half  
dozen communities in northern Bergen County, but each town has its  
own PSAP, whose responsibility is defined by the community, not the  
street.)


> Brian


_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
Ecrit at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit