Re: [Geopriv] Location-by-value in a SIP Location Header

Henning

Remind us what the unique use-case is for a data URL, where neither a 
by-reference URI nor a by-value PIDF-LO can be used?

In other words, why is this needed, and what would it be used for that 
every element necessary couldn't use one of the two methods of Location 
Conveyance already specified in the doc?

Complexity is an issue in location conveyance - especially during emergency 
calling, but I've heard you state this isn't an issue with a data URL.  Are 
you sure?  Are others sure?

At 09:57 AM 7/18/2006 -0400, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
>Brian,
>
>a four-step process:
>
>- take any PIDF-LO
>- wrap in XML-DSIG as specified by the relevant W3C recommendation
>- convert to base-64
>- make into a data URL, as in the example I gave in an earlier message
>
>   data:application/pidf+xml;base64,<base64-data>
>
>Or did I miss the point of your question?
>
>See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data:_URL for additional data URL
>examples, btw.
>
>Henning
>
>On Jul 18, 2006, at 9:06 AM, Rosen, Brian wrote:
>
>>Perhaps some enlightenment is in order.  It's not clear to me how you
>>dsig a Data uri in a Location header (or maybe you mean dsig the
>>pidf-lo
>>and put both the pidf-lo and the signature in the Data URI) somehow?
>>Are there some examples of this kind of thing elsewhere?
>>
>>If we are ignoring technical arguments (as opposed to use cases), it's
>>out of forgetfulness, and not willfulness.  What were you referring
>>to?
>>
>>Brian
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Geopriv mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

_______________________________________________
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