[07:57:21] --- jerome.grenier has joined
[08:15:19] --- jerome.grenier has left
[09:16:07] --- gcaron has joined
[09:16:26] <gcaron> test
[09:17:26] --- gcaron has left
[09:28:53] --- gcaron has joined
[09:29:51] --- jerome.grenier has joined
[09:29:58] <gcaron> test
[09:30:03] <gcaron> salut
[09:30:17] <jerome.grenier> re-test
[09:30:52] --- gcaron has left
[09:50:48] --- gcaron has joined
[10:01:20] --- nm has joined
[10:03:10] --- cullenfluffyjennings@gmail.com has joined
[10:04:02] --- hardie@jabber.psg.com has joined
[10:04:09] --- spencerdawkins has joined
[10:04:18] --- tetsu1 has joined
[10:04:19] --- otmar has joined
[10:04:20] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> If you would like something reflected to room, please preface the comment with ROOM:
[10:04:21] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> thanks
[10:06:40] --- Barbara has joined
[10:07:22] --- isudo has joined
[10:07:52] --- isudo has left
[10:09:31] --- secastro_scl has joined
[10:13:00] --- lisa has joined
[10:14:03] --- jhlim has joined
[10:14:15] --- richard.barnes has joined
[10:15:04] --- axelm has joined
[10:15:47] <axelm> for the records: i agree with the need of the binary-lci draft - we implemented RFC3825, and found the document very useful.
[10:16:11] --- bnsmith has joined
[10:17:34] --- rohan has joined
[10:21:14] --- kafka-j31415927 has joined
[10:21:29] --- randy has joined
[10:25:52] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> 同學們!
[10:27:47] --- isudo has joined
[10:28:07] --- isudo has left
[10:29:48] --- wolfgang.beck01 has joined
[10:32:20] --- Qian has joined
[10:34:38] --- adam has joined
[10:35:52] <Barbara> ROOM: Proposal was that wireless networks also return a LbyR.
[10:37:49] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> more?
[10:37:54] <rohan> Barabara: what?
[10:38:30] <Barbara> ROOM: Concern that wireless network would only retuen inaccurate value. It can return quick value plus LbyR
[10:38:59] <rohan> got it thx
[10:40:20] --- nm has left
[10:40:27] <Barbara> ROOM: Yes, that was my point
[10:41:53] --- linyi has joined
[10:44:15] --- david.mark.jones has joined
[10:45:21] <gcaron> ROOM: Canada will use Jurisdictional/Postal
[10:45:50] --- levigner has joined
[10:45:57] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> more please?
[10:46:31] <lisa> Blame Canada!
[10:47:10] <gcaron> ROOM: We have a need for charactizing the civic form. However, I agree this goes beyond HELD
[10:47:32] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> We've moved on a bit from there, but I will reflect to Mary and the minutes.
[10:47:54] <gcaron> Thx Ted
[10:52:06] <Barbara> Hum
[10:52:17] --- David Martin has joined
[10:52:19] <gcaron> ROOM: Hum for
[10:52:24] <Barbara> Hum that I'm comfortable.
[10:52:33] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> thanks
[10:54:36] <gcaron> ROOM: An optional tag in pidf-lo seems a good idea for proper characterization of a civic form.
[10:57:33] --- Barbara has left: Replaced by new connection
[10:57:33] --- Barbara has joined
[10:58:28] --- wolfgang.beck01 has left
[10:58:49] --- Barbara has left
[10:59:12] --- Barbara has joined
[11:00:11] --- jhlim has left: Disconnected
[11:02:39] --- nan_626 has joined
[11:04:56] --- hardie@jabber.psg.com has left
[11:05:10] <gcaron> Who's talking?
[11:05:37] <randy> Jon Peterson
[11:05:46] <randy> Now Hannes
[11:05:50] <gcaron> Thx
[11:06:26] --- isudo has joined
[11:07:12] --- hardie@jabber.qualcomm.com has joined
[11:07:47] --- isudo has left
[11:08:00] --- =JeffH has joined
[11:12:25] <spencerdawkins> don't red shirts die first on star trek?
[11:12:40] <Barbara> Just what I was thinking.
[11:12:46] --- hardie@jabber.qualcomm.com has left: Replaced by new connection.
[11:12:56] --- david.mark.jones has left
[11:14:33] --- adam has left
[11:14:57] --- nm has joined
[11:16:39] --- axelm has left: Replaced by new connection
[11:17:35] <Barbara> Hum, silent
[11:26:26] <jerome.grenier> ROOM: the discussion on RFC-4479 (Presence Data Model) also applies to draft-sip-location-conveyance-08 as it states that "all location parts of the same PIDF-LO MUST point at the same position on the earth"
[11:27:24] <=JeffH> so that statement is what all this discussion at the mike is about?
[11:28:10] <jerome.grenier> more or less, the current debate is about sending multiple PIDF-LOs and the actual location of the UAC
[11:28:28] <=JeffH> and perhaps the definition of "actual location" ?
[11:29:16] <gcaron> ROOM: Question on multiple LOs in SIP: How a location recipient be able to determine which one to use?
[11:29:32] <spencerdawkins> * 45m http-location-delivery - draft-ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery-01 Mary Barnes presenting - 00 version taken from Winterbottom draft. 01 draft added terms and tried to make them consistent with other documents. (see Mary's presentation for details) Hannes - terminology stuff has been haunting us for a while, document has redefinitions of other terms, this is a problem. Mary agrees. Suggestion to remove duplicate definitions. Slide 7: Hannes - try to differentiate between IAP and ISP in other documents. Why use new terms? Should be explicitly. James - L2- LCP becomes our glossary of terms? Is this the right place to do it, or in separate terminology document? Slide 8: Brian Rosen - still don't think Response time is useful, but don't want to be an obstructionist. Richard - has a lot of impacts on timers and relationships. Mary thought these timers were independent. Cullen - would wireless technologies end up with really inaccurate location for emergency calls with default Response Time of 0? Robert - who understands this question? Who is paying attention? Ted - compromise is workable, won't fall on my sword, but discussion on list has shown disagreements and these are showing up in other arguments as well. Need to come to agreement in order to avoid continued fights. Lisa - as APP technical advisor to the group - this really isn't compatible with HTTP architecture, could make suggestions if you provided more information about the use cases I could be more helpful. (We will follow up with Barbara) - Wireless network could return a quick value plus a reference for a more accurate value later. James Polk - would there be a response delay in returning a URI? Why is there a response time issue? Rohan - some applications want to block on a socket and wait for accurate information, others don't want to wait. Return location type and response time = 0. Mary - don't have total consensus yet. Slide 9: James - a lot of discussion happened on list since we made these slides. We're thinking "just request civic" in case there are differences between postal and jurisdictional civic addresses. James - how do you know whether your response is postal or jurisdictional? Slide 11: Canada will use both jurisdictional and postal forms of civic. Slide 12: Hannes - refers to underlying question about what this reference refers to. Could ask for value AND reference. Clarify kind of location you want. Later document provides this information. If you always request both types, that could be useful. Richard - need to clarify which dereferencing protocol is being used? James - not necessarily restricted to one mechanism. Hope we can discuss this during dereferencing presentations. Slide 13: Robert - asked onlist whether people were happy with 00 as starting point, got no negative responsive. Still happy? Hums in the room indicate so. Rohan - looking at schema of revised civic, would be nice to add attribute that distinguishes between jurisdictional or civic. Brian - bad idea, can't know what to do based on one attribute. James - what about civic locations that are neither postal nor jurisdictional. LIS document has been around for a while, without much discussion. Document needs to move. Hannes - if someone thinks this is useful, they should just write a document and explain why. Brian - from list - if there is a country that uses A fields in a different way than the post office uses them, we would need to know that, but don't think there are any countries that use A fields in a different way. Miguel??? - currently trying to figure out where to put the number in PIDF-LO Hannes - larger problem - DHCP discovery isn't controversial, but DNS discovery is. If we don't get proper input from other WGs, this will not be good.
[11:33:17] --- hardie@jabber.psg.com has joined
[11:33:46] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> guys, my client died; apologies
[11:33:54] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> Several ROOM: notes were missed as a result
[11:34:06] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> Can you resend any then are currently relevant?
[11:36:28] <gcaron> Replay (context is slide 3): [11:29:16] <gcaron> ROOM: Question on multiple LOs in SIP: How a location recipient be able to determine which one to use?
[11:44:23] --- axelm has joined
[11:44:57] * axelm has changed the subject to: IETF 69 geopriv meeting
[11:47:29] <spencerdawkins> Robert - will enforce the 20 minute limit. Do we only pres? with what event package? Rohan - location is a first-class object, can be addressed directly. -------------------------- (scribe break) Hannes - don't need to say anything about this in the SIP conveyance document Ted - multiple LLs in SIP (was previous discussion) Ted - "may dereferencing be done with presence" - answer in room is probably "yes" - Does anyone object? No one jumped up... Ted - if there are multiple ways, is the current presence event package Rohan put forward one of the ways? Don't see any reason for this document to limit to pres. Brian Rosen - discussion we've had multiple times - something beside SIP-pres - just don't get Rohan's proposal and don't want to hold up this document - not MUST, but CAN Rohan - don't think "no other event package" is relevant Jon - working group should not provide mechanisms that are not conformant to the working group charter
[11:52:30] <gcaron> ROOM: LbyR requirements should apply to all LCPs
[11:52:57] <spencerdawkins> who is speaking?
[11:53:08] <spencerdawkins> at back mike?
[11:53:11] <cullenfluffyjennings@gmail.com> Richard Barnes
[11:53:15] <spencerdawkins> thns!
[11:54:46] <gcaron> ROOM: Hum for WG item
[11:54:52] <Barbara> Hum, yes, WG item
[11:55:06] <jerome.grenier> ROOM: hum
[11:55:14] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> It's adopted.
[11:55:26] <gcaron> Good, thx.
[12:09:25] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> Hey, doesn't that connect it to the timers in the underlying protocol?
[12:09:29] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> <sorry>
[12:12:42] <Barbara> ROOM: Need timer to limit tracking.
[12:13:54] --- david.mark.jones has joined
[12:17:33] <gcaron> ROOM: Hum for pursuing further
[12:20:18] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> the point I was making derived from Lisa's. She pointed out that there are some types of URIs which would not make sense carried here (mailto:, for example). The possible response to that was to limit the list, and it was suggested that it be limited to the list of URIs for using protocols.
[12:21:11] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> As an architectural point, though, it might be useful to decide whether using a *single* option for every using protocol makes sense, rather than individual options. Radius and HELD are pretty different, and a client requesting this might request one over the other or only be able to use one.
[12:21:40] <hardie@jabber.psg.com> Deciding that question first before going forward seems to me useful, and why I think a rev as an individual submisssion makes sense.
[12:30:31] --- lisa has left: Computer went to sleep
[12:31:25] --- randy has left
[12:33:19] --- hardie@jabber.psg.com has left
[12:33:24] --- levigner has left
[12:34:29] --- tetsu1 has left
[12:34:35] <gcaron> Thanks Ted for voicing our comments.
[12:35:00] <Barbara> I'd participate in any sort of conference.
[12:35:09] --- cullenfluffyjennings@gmail.com has left
[12:35:56] <rohan> gcaron: i passed along your thanks to ted
[12:36:19] <gcaron> Thx Rohan
[12:36:24] --- Barbara has left
[12:37:05] --- gcaron has left
[12:37:35] --- Qian has left: Computer went to sleep
[12:37:49] --- david.mark.jones has left
[12:38:38] --- nan_626 has left
[12:42:16] --- axelm has left
[12:43:24] --- rohan has left
[12:46:43] --- spencerdawkins has left: Replaced by new connection
[12:47:03] --- =JeffH has left: Logged out
[12:54:26] --- nm has left
[12:54:33] --- otmar has left
[12:55:15] --- linyi has left
[12:56:08] --- jerome.grenier has left
[12:56:17] --- kafka-j31415927 has left
[12:58:19] --- secastro_scl has left: Replaced by new connection
[12:59:49] --- richard.barnes has left
[13:01:28] --- nm has joined
[14:03:38] --- David Martin has left
[14:10:10] --- nm has left: Replaced by new connection
[14:10:11] --- nm has joined
[14:10:11] --- nm has left
[14:42:12] --- =JeffH has joined
[14:42:16] --- =JeffH has left
[16:11:50] --- levigner has joined
[17:28:56] --- levigner has left
[17:44:11] --- levigner has joined
[19:35:18] --- levigner has left