Hi john,
Avi has answered your questions, however please couple of additional points/comments inline.
BR,
Farid
>
> > One reason for location information is as identified in this draft
> >
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-adrangi-radiusext-location-information-00.txt
> Having been through a similar exercize before, I don't much like the naming conventions
> in the above draft - section 2.2 for example.
[FA] Can you be more specific. We would be more than happy to use your suggestions and advice in improving the naming convention and other things in the draft.
> Also, there are some editing nits, for example the 'Æ' character in section 8.
[FA] Good catch -- I thought I fixed that!
> I'd prefer re-use of the work done in GEOPRIV.
[FA] Yes. We need to work with Mark Jones and others to make sure that we don't reinvent the wheels.
> Would you be looking at only access, or service specific issues as well?
> How does it map to the GEOPRIV deliverables - for example the SIP & HTTP
> drafts?
[FA] right now, GSMA requirements are for location-based access and accounting. We are also looking at location-based services, however we need to figure out how it maps to the GEOPPRIV deliverables as you pointed out.
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Tue, 17 Feb 2004 12:10:18 -0800
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 17 2004 - 18:32:51 EST