From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue Feb 5 12:53:54 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D95821F86D6; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 12:53:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.497 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dTjoZM8L6MGC; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 12:53:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B1921F8667; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 12:53:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20130205205353.26222.15735.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 12:53:53 -0800 Cc: geopriv@ietf.org Subject: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-18.txt X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:53:54 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group= of the IETF. Title : Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) IPv4 and IPv6= Option for a Location Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Author(s) : James Polk Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-18.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2013-02-05 Abstract: This document creates a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option for transmitting a client's geolocation Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), and another Option to explicitly indicate how long that location URI is to be considered valid. This Location URI can then be dereferenced in a separate transaction by the client or sent to another entity and dereferenced to learn physically where the client is located, but only while valid. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-18 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-= 18 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From rjsparks@nostrum.com Tue Feb 12 09:19:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 523DB21F8FBB for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:19:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SzmbeDhzEgSp for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B4A21F8FB9 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-173-57-99-236.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.57.99.236]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1CHJR7L055940 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:19:28 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) Message-ID: <511A799F.8040607@nostrum.com> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:19:27 -0600 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: GEOPRIV WG , draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity@tools.ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030506020906010408070206" Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.57.99.236 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Subject: [Geopriv] AD Review: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-00 X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:19:29 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030506020906010408070206 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Summary: There is one point that needs to be clarified with a revised ID before progressing to IETF LC. Thanks for producing such a succinct draft. This is one of the rare cases where we need more words, not fewer. The draft needs to be more explicit about whether it is _changing_ 6155 or if it is just extending it. The current use of Updates, and the language at the bottom of page 5 seems to say "All implementations of 6155 need to be updated right away - it's not ok and can result in error to continue to use the ports from 6155." If that's really the intent of the document, please say it that strongly (in the abstract and the introduction). If it was the intent only to provide an extension that could be used in circumstances where the base mechanism in 6155 would fail, then this extends 6155, not updates, and the header doesn't need to say anything. The protocol writeup needs to be adjusted to match the result - currently it says " Working Group Summary: This document is a simple extension to an existing protocol and was uncontroversial in the working group." which would be true if the intent was to only provide an extension as opposed to changing (Updating) the protocol in 6155. --------------030506020906010408070206 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Summary: There is one point that needs to be clarified with a revised ID before progressing to IETF LC.

Thanks for producing such a succinct draft. This is one of the rare cases where we need more words, not fewer.
The draft needs to be more explicit about whether it is _changing_ 6155 or if it is just extending it.

The current use of Updates, and the language at the bottom of page 5 seems to say "All implementations of 6155
need to be updated right away - it's not ok and can result in error to continue to use the ports from 6155." If that's
really the intent of the document, please say it that strongly (in the abstract and the introduction).

If it was the intent only to provide an extension that could be used in circumstances where the base mechanism in 6155
would fail, then this extends 6155, not updates, and the header doesn't need to say anything.

The protocol writeup needs to be adjusted to match the result - currently it says

" Working Group Summary:

This document is a simple extension to an existing protocol and was
uncontroversial in the working group."

which would be true if the intent was to only provide an extension as opposed to changing (Updating) the protocol in 6155.

--------------030506020906010408070206-- From martin.thomson@gmail.com Tue Feb 12 09:57:20 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A0721F9041 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:57:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.094 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.094 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.495, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NnQ2eB5DOEzT for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:57:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FC8D21F903A for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:57:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hi8so453161wib.7 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:57:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=YJZ9Gn1Kgeirm83oKWJ5fS4k1p+KoBHJCC0ryYxgCss=; b=JRqQOSV7glWeQmrIJjzn/riNA2DFE753p3EglGOVb96fEpEXhq3PZTFxhPiJ20z3Bp jfK1J1z4M352Jtsm/rJM9Yj5JztYRTUmBE+GnbN473dm6eKZnlGZzIUIkl+7wIiQZeNc jy5zAkaboOyXLaTDryVVj6qPXelh43TED1ZaRn2oi6NQ4ZRc/dX0C/N1XM4FrrvjMaVv nbmpI07vKBY1RWJLPUjryFONT3xmDRVrBfAcDfw9V6UgXVNeDy2HIP3RTBJ+nTfIZldi 98qYUogvJ7hzqKjJ6/+UDUrHyr1LW3reh8vEb0KlJYwNgxmpZ7kifM/9fkiOi4i6AMeO pxhg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.76.37 with SMTP id h5mr25869906wjw.21.1360691817871; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:56:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.5.135 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:56:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <511A799F.8040607@nostrum.com> References: <511A799F.8040607@nostrum.com> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:56:57 -0800 Message-ID: From: Martin Thomson To: Robert Sparks Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: GEOPRIV WG , draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [Geopriv] AD Review: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-00 X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:57:20 -0000 This is reasonable. There is a statement deprecating ports at the end of Section 3. At a minimum, that could be moved up. Highlighting the limited applicability of port is sufficient, and the draft could be more definite on this point. Moving this to the introduction might make this clear. """Given the limited applicability of using IP and port for identification, the port number elements from Section 3.3 of [RFC6155] are deprecated and MUST NOT be used. Flow identity provides a more generally applicable means of identifying devices behind NAT devices.""" Then I think that we can justify the "updates" clause. On 12 February 2013 09:19, Robert Sparks wrote: > Summary: There is one point that needs to be clarified with a revised ID > before progressing to IETF LC. > > Thanks for producing such a succinct draft. This is one of the rare cases > where we need more words, not fewer. > The draft needs to be more explicit about whether it is _changing_ 6155 or > if it is just extending it. > > The current use of Updates, and the language at the bottom of page 5 seems > to say "All implementations of 6155 > need to be updated right away - it's not ok and can result in error to > continue to use the ports from 6155." If that's > really the intent of the document, please say it that strongly (in the > abstract and the introduction). > > If it was the intent only to provide an extension that could be used in > circumstances where the base mechanism in 6155 > would fail, then this extends 6155, not updates, and the header doesn't need > to say anything. > > The protocol writeup needs to be adjusted to match the result - currently it > says > > " Working Group Summary: > > This document is a simple extension to an existing protocol and was > uncontroversial in the working group." > > which would be true if the intent was to only provide an extension as > opposed to changing (Updating) the protocol in 6155. > > > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > Geopriv@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv > From Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Tue Feb 12 13:03:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16FD921F8C03 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:03:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LRMqTk9sEXTm for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:03:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nominet.org.uk (mail.nominet.org.uk [213.248.199.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AFF121F8C00 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:03:04 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: s=main.dk.nominet.selector; d=nominet.org.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:Received:Received:From:To:Subject: Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Date:Message-ID:References: In-Reply-To:Accept-Language:Content-Language: X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:x-originating-ip: Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding: MIME-Version; b=bQ/8oXktrio5fwNaY6g4OPnZ4zmTxrhEYEFPqbZ7H/4UzttTe1HpryRd 9ECJMnHnKJlN1HPodOuugcuWAthq8zE0xK7xGGw9LnFKpWx5+ZScAIIch JyfbcAdCB22g3/N; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nominet.org.uk; i=Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; q=dns/txt; s=main.dkim.nominet.selector; t=1360702984; x=1392238984; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20Ray=20Bellis=20 |Subject:=20Re:=20[Geopriv]=20AD=20Review:=20draft-ietf-g eopriv-flow-identity-00|Date:=20Tue,=2012=20Feb=202013=20 21:03:00=20+0000|Message-ID:=20<53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB 0B4FE73104F9A6C@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk>|To:=20GEOPR IV=20WG=20|MIME-Version:=201.0 |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted-printable |Content-ID:=20<1402FD0AF1FEC34C83BE7E220A02E4CD@okna.nom inet.org.uk>|In-Reply-To:=20|References: =20<511A799F.8040607@nostrum.com>=0D=0A=20; bh=bzM2l1h/Dd6Dxq87uMQRVVqeZDu9Ip6HCe3iLJDkIIg=; b=O95ivwEdx892IvAT7PQC3CTWgp6Lskjsu8uh8D0EN9h7Vldr3SgVf5X5 BFEbgP/ryPSDnH0Jo6QEA4fZ9N18Vm4SKcg/CYud4rL+21IK6jTRJ/3dm KOvk5qtsMd62omV; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,652,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="38357997" Received: from wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([213.248.197.145]) by mx4.nominet.org.uk with ESMTP; 12 Feb 2013 21:03:01 +0000 Received: from WDS-EXC1.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::1593:1394:a91f:8f5f]) by wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::7577:eaca:5241:25d4%17]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:03:01 +0000 From: Ray Bellis To: GEOPRIV WG Thread-Topic: [Geopriv] AD Review: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-00 Thread-Index: AQHOCUUhIOH78Iw9rE2ITKAw65/W4ph2giiAgAA0A4A= Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:03:00 +0000 Message-ID: <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104F9A6C@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk> References: <511A799F.8040607@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.1] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1402FD0AF1FEC34C83BE7E220A02E4CD@okna.nominet.org.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Geopriv] AD Review: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-00 X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:03:08 -0000 On 12 Feb 2013, at 17:56, Martin Thomson wrote: > This is reasonable. There is a statement deprecating ports at the end > of Section 3. At a minimum, that could be moved up. >=20 > Highlighting the limited applicability of port is sufficient, and the > draft could be more definite on this point. Moving this to the > introduction might make this clear. >=20 > """Given the limited applicability of using IP and port for > identification, the port number elements from Section 3.3 of [RFC6155] > are deprecated and MUST NOT be used. Flow identity provides a more > generally applicable means of identifying devices behind NAT > devices.""" >=20 > Then I think that we can justify the "updates" clause. Thanks Robert for the comments, and Martin for the suggested text. I'll incorporate this (or something very similar to it, given that this nee= ds to blend nicely with paragraph 2 of the introduction) and rev the docume= nt shortly. thanks, Ray From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Feb 13 03:04:55 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD5821F88E1; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:04:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cl61DGsOKDOF; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C4521F88FD; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:04:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130213110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:04:54 -0800 Cc: geopriv@ietf.org Subject: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:04:55 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group= of the IETF. Title : Flow Identity Extension for HELD Author(s) : Ray Bellis Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2013-02-13 Abstract: RFC 6155 specifies an extension for the HTTP-Enabled Location Delivery (HELD) Protocol allowing the use of an IP address and port number to request a Device location based on an individual packet flow. However, certain kinds of NAT require that identifiers for both ends of the packet flow must be specified in order to unambiguously satisfy the location request. This document specifies an XML Schema and URN Sub-Namespace for a Flow Identity Extension for HELD to support this requirement. This document updates RFC 6155 by deprecating the port number elements specified therein. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk Wed Feb 13 03:35:52 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5805A21F8618 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:35:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VbR+GfKKi3Xm for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:35:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nominet.org.uk (mx4.nominet.org.uk [213.248.199.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9BA21F8600 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:35:48 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: s=main.dk.nominet.selector; d=nominet.org.uk; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:Received:Received:From:To:Subject: Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Date:Message-ID:References: In-Reply-To:Accept-Language:Content-Language: X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:x-originating-ip: Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding: MIME-Version; b=RyK2qEyUJVP1ztX+sIRN9ic68q+bJfRIQ+c7ycM/eO3w9y7xWp/eLBUq u5BXAeS23BK0GrX4sxY2Dje93DLsryjpQsVyDxRdLfMRIB59pgyFOfBBz s5MJDJbllQ+MEkZ; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nominet.org.uk; i=Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk; q=dns/txt; s=main.dkim.nominet.selector; t=1360755349; x=1392291349; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20Ray=20Bellis=20 |Subject:=20Re:=20[Geopriv]=20I-D=20Action:=20draft-ietf- geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt|Date:=20Wed,=2013=20Feb=2020 13=2011:35:45=20+0000|Message-ID:=20<53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0 C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk>|To:=20 "geopriv@ietf.org=20WG"=20 |MIME-Version:=201.0|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted- printable|Content-ID:=20|In-Reply-To:=20<20130213110454.3057 5.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>|References:=20<20130213 110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>; bh=glmjwtOG8guOpeJnPo4RvFGhuUmMYlvA5ebWkSwmqP8=; b=xrbEZz0tgjWOyx4Wrc+ny2aSx8PSHZhVa19S4QFDVBl3mf+gSCi5o/rn zpohq3s1LTeSVBG4GRQeDVRqQPu8cNLMQ/j95PV88UNoV8aZStNxJK9sX qxmFKeLVMMGLv27; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,657,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="38372418" Received: from wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([213.248.197.145]) by mx4.nominet.org.uk with ESMTP; 13 Feb 2013 11:35:47 +0000 Received: from WDS-EXC1.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::1593:1394:a91f:8f5f]) by wds-exc2.okna.nominet.org.uk ([fe80::7577:eaca:5241:25d4%17]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:35:45 +0000 From: Ray Bellis To: "geopriv@ietf.org WG" Thread-Topic: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt Thread-Index: AQHOCdoCy5bAHwNjAEOxqf0rnZytbJh3qNAA Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:35:45 +0000 Message-ID: <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk> References: <20130213110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130213110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.2.1] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:35:52 -0000 On 13 Feb 2013, at 11:04, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direct= ories. > This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Grou= p of the IETF. >=20 > Title : Flow Identity Extension for HELD > Author(s) : Ray Bellis > Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt > Pages : 14 > Date : 2013-02-13 >=20 I've submitted this version in response to AD and proto writeup comments, m= ostly around how it updates RFC 6155. The abstract has been rewritten somewhat to make it clearer, and to explici= tly mention that this document deprecates the port elements from RFC 6155. What was the final paragraph of =A73 has been moved into the Introduction a= nd rewritten thus: Since the Location Recipient may not know in advance whether the Target is behind a NAT device the port number elements from Section 3.3 of [RFC6155] are deprecated and MUST NOT be used. This document provides a more generally applicable means of identifying a Device based on the parameters of a network flow of which it is an endpoint. Alissa had proposed the following text in her proto writeup: "It updates RFC 6155 to include this extension ..." I've explicitly *not* included such text because technically this document = is a *new* extension, not an addition to the RFC 6155 schema. Ray From rjsparks@nostrum.com Wed Feb 13 07:31:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05DB21F86D8 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:31:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ez3ZBedk0pCl for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:31:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F58E21F86C8 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:31:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from unnumerable.tekelec.com ([4.30.77.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1DFV3rx003941 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:31:03 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) Message-ID: <511BB1B9.8080402@nostrum.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:31:05 -0600 From: Robert Sparks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ray Bellis References: <20130213110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 4.30.77.1 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism) Cc: "geopriv@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:31:09 -0000 I'll request IETF LC on this version. Everyone please note carefully the strengthening of the deprecation in this change. If you are not ok with the SHOULD NOT -> MUST NOT change, speak up during IETF LC. RjS On 2/13/13 5:35 AM, Ray Bellis wrote: > On 13 Feb 2013, at 11:04, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : Flow Identity Extension for HELD >> Author(s) : Ray Bellis >> Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt >> Pages : 14 >> Date : 2013-02-13 >> > I've submitted this version in response to AD and proto writeup comments, mostly around how it updates RFC 6155. > > The abstract has been rewritten somewhat to make it clearer, and to explicitly mention that this document deprecates the port elements from RFC 6155. > > What was the final paragraph of 3 has been moved into the Introduction and rewritten thus: > > Since the Location Recipient may not know in advance whether the > Target is behind a NAT device the port number elements from Section > 3.3 of [RFC6155] are deprecated and MUST NOT be used. This document > provides a more generally applicable means of identifying a Device > based on the parameters of a network flow of which it is an endpoint. > > Alissa had proposed the following text in her proto writeup: > > "It updates RFC 6155 to include this extension ..." > > I've explicitly *not* included such text because technically this document is a *new* extension, not an addition to the RFC 6155 schema. > > Ray > > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > Geopriv@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Wed Feb 13 08:03:15 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 258A821F88B5; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.53 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AGbvMAf7phfb; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58FE421F88A8; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:14 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130213160314.11592.22003.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:14 -0800 Cc: geopriv@ietf.org Subject: [Geopriv] Last Call: (Flow Identity Extension for HELD) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:03:15 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Geographic Location/Privacy WG (geopriv) to consider the following document: - 'Flow Identity Extension for HELD' as Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-02-27. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract RFC 6155 specifies an extension for the HTTP-Enabled Location Delivery (HELD) Protocol allowing the use of an IP address and port number to request a Device location based on an individual packet flow. However, certain kinds of NAT require that identifiers for both ends of the packet flow must be specified in order to unambiguously satisfy the location request. This document specifies an XML Schema and URN Sub-Namespace for a Flow Identity Extension for HELD to support this requirement. This document updates RFC 6155 by deprecating the port number elements specified therein. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Wed Feb 13 08:03:15 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2595F21F88DA for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.53 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5+Gl8zcRWuhf; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7397021F88B2; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:14 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IANA X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 X-IETF-Draft-string: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity X-IETF-Draft-revision: 01 Message-ID: <20130213160314.11592.7299.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:03:14 -0800 Cc: geopriv@ietf.org Subject: [Geopriv] Last Call: (Flow Identity Extension for HELD) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: noreply@ietf.org List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:03:15 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Geographic Location/Privacy WG (geopriv) to consider the following document: - 'Flow Identity Extension for HELD' as Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-02-27. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract RFC 6155 specifies an extension for the HTTP-Enabled Location Delivery (HELD) Protocol allowing the use of an IP address and port number to request a Device location based on an individual packet flow. However, certain kinds of NAT require that identifiers for both ends of the packet flow must be specified in order to unambiguously satisfy the location request. This document specifies an XML Schema and URN Sub-Namespace for a Flow Identity Extension for HELD to support this requirement. This document updates RFC 6155 by deprecating the port number elements specified therein. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. From James.Winterbottom@commscope.com Wed Feb 13 18:21:21 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F304121E80CE for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:21:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9byX02n193IO for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:21:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from cdcsmgw02.commscope.com (smtp1.andrew.com [198.135.207.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27B221E8047 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:21:19 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 0a0404e9-b7f6c6d00000085c-ce-511c4a1e07c1 Received: from CDCE10HC2.commscope.com ( [10.86.28.22]) by cdcsmgw02.commscope.com (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 6B.A1.02140.E1A4C115; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:21:18 -0600 (CST) Received: from SISPE7HC1.commscope.com (10.97.4.12) by CDCE10HC2.commscope.com (10.86.28.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.309.2; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 20:21:18 -0600 Received: from SISPE7MB1.commscope.com ([fe80::9d82:a492:85e3:a293]) by SISPE7HC1.commscope.com ([fe80::8a9:4724:f6bb:3cdf%10]) with mapi; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 10:21:15 +0800 From: "Winterbottom, James" To: Robert Sparks , Ray Bellis Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 10:21:14 +0800 Thread-Topic: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt Thread-Index: Ac4J/ykwz1h8U2+zT5y9wgVF7QohzQAWsi6g Message-ID: <5A55A45AE77F5941B18E5457ECAC818801213A68C92E@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> References: <20130213110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk> <511BB1B9.8080402@nostrum.com> In-Reply-To: <511BB1B9.8080402@nostrum.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrHKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXCFSYjpivnJRNo8OSktcXnQ5+ZLT51PWe1 uDankc2B2WPJkp9MHifmzmPymLXzCUsAcxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxr3TS1kK9gpVHO5ey9jA eJOvi5GDQ0LARGL3Rr0uRk4gU0ziwr31bF2MXBxCArsYJV5PWwLlbGCUeHx2JyuEs45RYsfd e6wgLWwCdhKH199gBrFFBIIkju2eyQZiMwvoSLz/toEdxGYRUJW40NAIFhcW8JLoWr+IHWSz iIC3RN/faohWI4mHN94zgti8QGPen57NDLFrDaPE6WXPwHZxCmhLbJp5kgnEZgQ69fupNUwQ u8Qlbj2ZzwTxgoDEkj3nmSFsUYmXj/+xQtSLStxpX88IUa8ncWPqFKg7tSWWLXzNDLFYUOLk zCcsILaQgK5E086vrBMYJWYhWTELSfssJO2zkLQvYGRZxSienJJcnJtebmCkl5yfm1ucnF+Q CmJtYgRFIgvLyx2MZzdoH2IU4GBU4uGt+CMdKMSaWFZcmXuIUZKDSUmUN99DJlCILyk/pTIj sTgjvqg0J7X4EKMEB7OSCO8DJaAcb0piZVVqUT5MSoODQ+D0k/unGKVY8vLzUpUkeDeAjBAs Sk1PrUjLzAGmIZhSJg5OkFE8QKPOg9TwFhck5hZnpkPkTzGqcjQvf/6CUQhskJQ47yGQIgGQ oozSPLg5rxjFgY4X5r0KkuUBJlK4Ca+AhjMBDWdcKwUyvCQRISXVwGi0+WhBxd/ke53VXs/T bV/GuAj/jJE/4Xk73OPPtxaVXqZ11yb5ZOh6PXR5s+OQ/l3V16Gesa++yDPN5Hp+6BVT1YXj sX7nyzuS1nNeenWXY0NESdq+r3YlD1c/1Jzcslixy6JI/bPPBu07lcdueU06Eb92ofthr2sr J/3kfyZ6K2+Ble+JqTVKLMUZiYZazEXFiQA85ZktYQMAAA== Cc: "geopriv@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 02:21:21 -0000 I am fine with this change. -----Original Message----- From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Robert Sparks Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2013 2:31 AM To: Ray Bellis Cc: geopriv@ietf.org WG Subject: Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt I'll request IETF LC on this version. Everyone please note carefully the strengthening of the deprecation in this= change. If you are not ok with the SHOULD NOT -> MUST NOT change, speak up= during IETF LC. RjS On 2/13/13 5:35 AM, Ray Bellis wrote: > On 13 Feb 2013, at 11:04, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direc= tories. >> This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Gro= up of the IETF. >> >> Title : Flow Identity Extension for HELD >> Author(s) : Ray Bellis >> Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt >> Pages : 14 >> Date : 2013-02-13 >> > I've submitted this version in response to AD and proto writeup comments,= mostly around how it updates RFC 6155. > > The abstract has been rewritten somewhat to make it clearer, and to expli= citly mention that this document deprecates the port elements from RFC 6155= . > > What was the final paragraph of =A73 has been moved into the Introduction= and rewritten thus: > > Since the Location Recipient may not know in advance whether the > Target is behind a NAT device the port number elements from Section > 3.3 of [RFC6155] are deprecated and MUST NOT be used. This document > provides a more generally applicable means of identifying a Device > based on the parameters of a network flow of which it is an endpoint. > > Alissa had proposed the following text in her proto writeup: > > "It updates RFC 6155 to include this extension ..." > > I've explicitly *not* included such text because technically this documen= t is a *new* extension, not an addition to the RFC 6155 schema. > > Ray > > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > Geopriv@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv _______________________________________________ Geopriv mailing list Geopriv@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sun Feb 24 18:50:55 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1418621F9119; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:50:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.47 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.47 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xlnszNqBdJgW; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:50:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C7AC21F9192; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:50:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.40 Message-ID: <20130225025054.6528.81623.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:50:54 -0800 Cc: geopriv@ietf.org Subject: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-19.txt X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 02:50:55 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group= of the IETF. Title : Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) IPv4 and IPv6= Option for a Location Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Author(s) : James Polk Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-19.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2013-02-24 Abstract: This document creates a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option for transmitting a client's geolocation Uniform Resource Identifier (URI). This Location URI can then be dereferenced in a separate transaction by the client or sent to another entity and dereferenced to learn physically where the client is located, but only while valid. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-19 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-= 19 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/