Location Types Registry
RFC 4589
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) Yes
(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) Yes
(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) Yes
(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
Based on Gen-ART review by John Loughney, but backing up David's Discuss.
The types are quite soft in nature and not algorithmically precise.
The scope for interpretation is wide. This will make both the expert
reviewer's task very vague, and operational choices very unclear.
"I found many of the location types confusing, for
example:
water:
The person is on water, such as an ocean, lake, river, canal or
other waterway.
watercraft:
The person is traveling in a boat or ship.
What about a swimmer or SCUBA diver? What if the boat is not moving, is
it still traveling? My gut feeling is that the place needs to be
separate from the action. Addtionally, prepositions should be separate
from the place (i.e. - on, in, above, under, etc.).
In summary - the location places should be just locations, there should
be no linkage to the activity of the target with respect to the
location."
(David Kessens; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) No Objection
(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) No Objection
(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ross Callon; former steering group member) No Objection
(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection
To my great surprise, I'm a no-objection on this document rather than a discuss or abstain. The authors have done a good job of explaining how the registry might be used in enough detail that protocol designers can determine if this registry is appropriate. Also, the IANA considerations are much improved. Thanks for the great work with last call comments.
(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) No Objection