A LoST extension to return complete and similar location info
draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-06

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (ecrit WG)
Last updated 2018-10-23
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead (wg milestone: Aug 2017 - Submit ‘A LoST exten... )
Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by WG
Document shepherd Allison Mankin
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to "Allison Mankin" <allison.mankin@gmail.com>
ECRIT                                                        R. Marshall
Internet-Draft                                                 J. Martin
Intended status: Standards Track                             Comtech TCS
Expires: April 26, 2019                                         B. Rosen
                                                                 Neustar
                                                        October 23, 2018

     A LoST extension to return complete and similar location info
                  draft-ietf-ecrit-similar-location-06

Abstract

   This document introduces a new way to provide returned location
   information in LoST responses that is either of a completed or
   similar form to the original input civic location, based on whether
   valid or invalid civic address elements are returned within the
   findServiceResponse message.  This document defines a new extension
   to the findServiceResponse message within the LoST protocol [RFC5222]
   that enables the LoST protocol to return a completed civic address
   element set for a valid location response, and one or more suggested
   sets of similar location information for invalid LoST responses.
   These two types of civic addresses are referred to as either
   "complete location" or "similar location", and are included as a
   compilation of CAtype xml elements within the existing LoST
   findServiceResponse message structure.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 26, 2019.

Marshall, et al.         Expires April 26, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    Returned Location Extensions to LoST      October 2018

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Overview of Returned Location Information . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Returned Location Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Examples  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.1.  Complete Location returned for Valid Location response  .   8
     5.2.  Similar Location returned for Invalid Location response .  10
   6.  XML Schema  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     8.1.  XML Schema Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     8.2.  LoST-RLI Namespace Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16

1.  Introduction

   The LoST protcol [RFC5222] supports the validation of civic location
   information as input, by providing a set of validation result status
   indicators.  The current usefulness of the supported xml elements,
   "valid", "invalid", and "unchecked", is limited, because while they
   each provide an indication of validity for any one location element
   as a part of the whole civic address, the mechanism is insufficient
   in providing either the complete set of civic address elements that
   the LoST server contains, or of providing alternate suggestions
   (hints) as to which civic address is intended for use.

   Whether the input civic location is valid and missing information, or
   invalid due to missing or wrong information during input, this

Marshall, et al.         Expires April 26, 2019                 [Page 2]
Show full document text