[Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes

Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com> Mon, 30 March 2009 02:08 UTC

Message-ID: <49D029E3.6000803@bbn.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:09:39 -0400
From: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 'GEOPRIV' <geopriv@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes
Precedence: list

Hi all,

Assuming the consensus expressed in the GEOPRIV meeting (to fix, not
replace 3825) is confirmed by the list, I would like to get a feeling
for what scope should be allowed for these fixes.

There are 4 modifications that have been proposed across the 3 drafts:
1. Addition of a switch that changes the meaning of the "*res" fields
2. Deprecation of the "floor" altitude type
3. Addition of an uncertainty radius (i.e., a GML circle)
4. Switch to a TLV-based geo-element format

Number (1) seems clearly in scope, since this is the fix that was agreed
to at IETF 71 (Philadelphia).

Number (4) seems clearly out of scope, since it breaks backward
compatibility and substantially replaces RFC 3825.

What do people think about (2) and (3)?

--Richard

Re: [Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes Gabor.Bajko
Re: [Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes Winterbottom, James
[Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes Richard Barnes
Re: [Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes Henning Schulzrinne
Re: [Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes Thomson, Martin
Re: [Geopriv] Scope of 3825 fixes Alissa Cooper