RE: RE: RE: draft-jones-radius-geopriv

["Adrangi, Farid" <farid.adrangi@intel.com>]

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.



--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>