Re: [Ecrit] Location hiding: Consensus?

[Andrew Newton <andy at hxr.us>]

On May 9, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> Are you suggesting that, from a technical standpoint, hiding  
> location from the end system is a good idea?

I think you misunderstood my point.  Simply put, if you are going  
through the trouble to support location hiding, you should support it  
fully and not partially.

> Unfortunately, in your model, the VSP would have no way to do any  
> validation at all, since it is not operating a trusted LoST server,  
> according to our 'no business relationship' requirement and thus  
> can't resolve the reference. Thus, your model actually fails to  
> support the validation requirements. That's certainly good to note.

Hmmm... yet in your model, the PSAP is somehow known as a trusted  
entity when dereferencing location.  In whatever way that occurs,  
which has not been explained, the VSP can also use that trust  
relationship to determine if it is sending calls to a PSAP.

There is another issue with the validation step.  Taking Brian's now- 
infamous VSP in Sierra Leone, how can you be assured that the LoST  
tree used by the VSP is capable of traversing to the LoST tree used  
by the LIS?

> I'm using Brian's variation of my proposal. The LIS computes, based  
> on its querying of LoST, a geometric shape such as a polygon or  
> circle whose centroid/center lands in the right PSAP and includes  
> the current location of the client, presumably somewhere other than  
> in the center.
>
> The VSP does exactly the same computation, again taking the center  
> of the circle to do the lookup. Thus, it performs no special  
> operation and is not concerned with holes in service areas at all.

Since the computation is the same, why not just send the point that  
is the centroid?

-andy

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