Hi Jeroen, I thought that Brian's message was adequate. For some reasons certain based SIP mechanisms have not widely been implemented. Some things take more time than others.
I would also like to hear whether there are truely barriers for adoption or whether it just takes some time before we see certain features getting implemented. I would like to understand the complexity of the proposed mechanisms, if you see some. I am obviously in favor of simplifications. Ciao hannes > Hi Hannes, > > I was responding to Brian's message. He basically says: SIPit results show > that the mechanisms needed to implement location conveyance are not widely > implemented yet, we need to tell implementors to hurry it up > > I question whether that approach works, and turn it around by asking: why > are these mechanisms not implemented widely? > > Personally I believe a significant part of the answer lies in the > complexity > of the proposed mechanisms, architecure, etc. So instead of trying to push > the market to adopt the solution that is now on the table, perhaps we > should > look into what we can do to lower the barriers for adoption > > Regards, > Jeroen > > Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > > Hi Frank, > > Hi Jeroen, > > Hi Juha, > > Hi all > > > > what exactly is your complaint? Are you unhappy about > > * XML encoding of location information > > * location information carried in the body instead of the header > > * number of location shapes (see > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-06.txt) > > * the inability of GPS to work in certain environments > > * Geopriv location and privacy architecture > > * Ecrit emergency services architecture > > ? > > > > Ciao > > Hannes > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > Datum: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 17:23:42 -0600 > > Von: "Frank W. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > An: Cullen Jennings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > CC: \'IETF SIP List\' <[email protected]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Juha > > Heinanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED], \'Robert > > Sparks\' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Betreff: Re: [Sip] SIPit 20 survey > > summary > > > >> > >> Acknowledged. However, if we're talking about adding messaging > >> infrastructure to SIP, then the discussion is quite relevant here. I > >> for one would vote for a simpler mechanism than multipart MIME XML > >> blah blah blah. With regards to Keith's comments, I would love to > >> sit down and provide an alternative proposal but I just don't have > >> the time to do it. With all due respect, I'll implement whatever > >> the standards committee comes up with, but I don't think its > >> unreasonable for me or anyone else to express concern about protocol > >> that is obviously designed by committee and obviously more > >> complicated that it probably has to be. > >> > >> FM > >> > >> > >> On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 15:23 -0700, Cullen Jennings wrote: > >>> There has been an incredible amount of work on this topic across > >>> many standard organizations including the IETF. Before people start > >>> in on discussing this in - I strongly suggest they might want to > >>> read some of the requirements, uses cases, drafts, and mailing list > >>> discussions in ECRIT and GEOPRIV. Please keep in mind the charters > >>> of ECRIT/ GEOPRIV/SIP and take the discussion to the right working > >>> group. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Apr 28, 2007, at 2:35 AM, Juha Heinanen wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jeroen van Bemmel writes: > >>>> > >>>>> Especially for the use case of emergency calls, would it not be > >>>>> wise to > >>>>> select a much more simple approach/syntax, e.g.: > >>>>> Emergency-Location: lat=x; lon=y > >>>>> > >>>>> So no XML, no mime/multipart, as simple as possible (no complex > >>>>> semantics, > >>>>> usage-rules etc), something to reduce the barrier of > >>>>> implementation/deployment, and to reduce the risk for interop > >>>>> issues? > >>>> > >>>> i fully agree with this. we should follow KISS principle here. > >>>> it is highly unlikely that sip ua vendors will even TRY implement > >>>> such a complex protocol. > >>>> > >>>> another reason why it will not get implemented is that sip uas > >>>> don't know where they are located. gps does not work well indoors > >>>> and mobile > >>>> operators at least here have refused to make public coordinates of > >>>> their > >>>> base stations. > >>>> > >>>> -- juha > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > >>>> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol > >>>> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > >>>> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > >>> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol > >>> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > >>> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > >> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol > >> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > >> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol > > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
