Re: [Ecrit] draft-george-ecrit-lamp-post-00]

[Robins George <robinsg at huawei.com>]

I 'd prefer using the PIDF-LO IANA procedure for adding a new element 
for lamp posts.
I think that re-using the address code is probably not a particularly 
good idea.

-robins

Karl Heinz Wolf wrote:
> Wouldn't the ADDCODE (Additional Code) element be a good place for the
> lamp number code?
>
> karl heinz
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Winterbottom, James
> <James.Winterbottom at andrew.com> wrote:
>   
> > A couple of things.
> >
> > First this should be posted to geopriv and ecrit.
> >
> > Secondly, could these not be covered by the LOC and landmark fields?
> >
> > Cheers
> > James
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Robins George
> > Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2009 2:24 PM
> > To: ECRIT IETF
> > Subject: [Ecrit] draft-george-ecrit-lamp-post-00]
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I have submitted a draft which describes an extension to civic location
> > format and
> > adds new element PN (pole number). PN carries utility and lamp post
> > number
> > information which can identify a civic location.
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-george-ecrit-lamp-post-00
> >
> > Comments are appreciated.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Robins.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >