Re: RE: [Geopriv] Consensus on changes to location-conveyance
"James M. Polk" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip,gmane.ietf.geopriv |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 11:37 PM 7/26/2006 -0400, Andrew Newton wrote: >On Jul 26, 2006, at 11:27 PM, James M. Polk wrote: > >>I think Geopriv really needs to look at HTTP as a RFC 3693 "using >>protocol" to tease out any unique characteristics with that >>protocol. That discussion and review shouldn't bog this document >>down. Does this sound fair? > >Most definitely. We've had discussions on HTTP as a using protocol >for 3 years in GEOPRIV, HELD being the latest incarnation. The first >proposals ran into serious privacy concerns. Anything that simply >says "use HTTP" is an attempt to work around answering the serious >privacy concerns raised in GEOPRIV. is this said with your WG chair hat on? It sounds pretty definitive to these ears... >-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 _______________________________________________ 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