Re: RE: [Geopriv] Consensus on changes to location-conveyance

For location-based routing case, the likelihood of significant updates 
in the roughly one second that a call might take from caller to callee 
seems unlikely. UAS subscription and polling is clearly more valuable, 
so maybe we need to distinguish these cases. (As discussed earlier, 
mid-routing updates may lead to bad outcomes since the call might have 
been sent to a place A that doesn't know what to do with location update 
n+1 since that new location is really handled by place B.)

Andrew Newton wrote:
> Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
>>> I believe there are two technical arguments: one is legacy equipment 
>>> (the issue that I'll be facing for quite some time), and environments 
>>> where the location is generated by the network.  For the latter, 
>>> insertion of the Location header only in emergency situations still 
>>> puts the user in control for non-emergency situations.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> For the latter, the combination of the in-progress L7 protocols, DHCP 
>> and LLDP should presumably allow the UAC to obtain location and insert 
>> it by value. Is there a use case not covered by that?
> 
> As I said, where location comes from the network.  In this scenario, 
> there are two possibilities, both up to the user: 1) the UAC subscribes 
> to the location from the network and puts it by value in the call 
> flow... meaning all location updates go through the UAC, or 2) the UAC 
> hands out a reference so updates can be independent of the UAC or 
> updates based on subscription come from the UAC but are independent of 
> the call.
> 
> -andy

_______________________________________________
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