Network Working Group B. Rosen
Internet-Draft NeuStar
Intended status: Informational July 3, 2009
Expires: January 4, 2010
Interior Location in PIDF-LO
draft-rosen-geopriv-pidf-interior-00
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract
RFC5139 defines explicit tags for interior building location such as
"BLD" (building), "UNIT", "ROOM". There is wide variation in how
interior spaces are named, and the rigid element names provided do
Rosen Expires January 4, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Interior Location in PIDF-LO July 2009
not allow accurate representation of interior spaces that don't use
the element tags defined. This memo provides an alternative
mechanism that provides an extensible flexible way to name spaces in
any kind of addressible location.
Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. INT element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Civic Address Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.1. XML Schema Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.2. CAtype Registry Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Rosen Expires January 4, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Interior Location in PIDF-LO July 2009
1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Introduction
[RFC4119] provides a way to specify an addressable civic location,
naming the country, region, city, street name, etc. Within that
document is an element FLR (floor) which specifies location within
the addressable location. [RFC5139] extends the ability to locate
interior spaces by defining BLD (Building), UNIT, ROOM, and SEAT.
The problem with these elements is that there is very wide variation
in how interior spaces are named, and these fixed elements don't
allow one to specify interior location that matches signage, drawings
or other conventions that are needed to properly locate targets
within an addressable location. An example of where the BLD/FLR/
UNIT/ROOM doesn't work is an airport. Interior location may be given
as Terminal 2, Concourse A, Gate 27.
Additionally, since interior location may vary within a structure
(Terminal 2, Food Court, Store 13), and every building could have
different conventions, it is essential that a way to parse a sign,
drawing, or other representation of interior space to the elements
needed to specify that space in a PIDF, or the reverse: creating a
human readible string from a PIDF matching signage or drawings, it
must be possible to specify how the conversion from human readible to
PIDF and vice versa can be accomplished.
3. INT element
This memo introduces a new CAtype for PIDF-LO called "INT" (for
interior) which has two new attributes:
N The locally significant name of a "level" of interior space.
Examples include "Floor", "Concourse" and "Suite".
R An enumeration of how the name and value are represented in a
human readible form.
A PIDF-LO may have multiple INT elements. If there are more than
one, the order in which they appear in the PIDF can be signficant.
The R attribute has the following values:
Rosen Expires January 4, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Interior Location in PIDF-LO July 2009
B The name is expressed before the value as in "Concourse A".
A The name is expressed after the value as in "Presidential
Suite".
If the R subelement is not present, the default value "B" is assumed.
Editor's note: Should FLR, BLD, ROOM, ... be deprecated? I think we
should.
4. Civic Address Schema
TBD
5. Examples
AU
NSW
Wollongong
North Wollongong
FlindersStreet
Video Rental Store
2500
Westerns and Classics
US
PA
Findlay
AirportRD
1
A
37
6. Security Considerations
The XML representation described in this document is designed for
inclusion in a PIDF-LO document. As such, it is subject to the same
security considerations as are described in [RFC4119].
Considerations relating to the inclusion of this representation in
other XML documents are outside the scope of this document.
Rosen Expires January 4, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Interior Location in PIDF-LO July 2009
7. IANA Considerations
7.1. XML Schema Registration
This section replaces the existing XML namespace per the procedures
of [RFC3688]
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:pidf:geopriv10:civicAddr
Registrant Contact: IETF, GEOPRIV working group (geopriv@ietf.org),
Brian Rosen (brian.rosen@neustar.biz).
The XML for this schema can be found as the entirety of Section 4
of this document.
7.2. CAtype Registry Update
This document updates the civic address type registry established by
[RFC4776]. One additional value is added:
40 INT Interior Location
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object
Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.
[RFC5139] Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Revised Civic Location
Format for Presence Information Data Format Location
Object (PIDF-LO)", RFC 5139, February 2008.
8.2. Informative References
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
January 2004.
[RFC4776] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
(DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses
Configuration Information", RFC 4776, November 2006.
Rosen Expires January 4, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Interior Location in PIDF-LO July 2009
Author's Address
Brian Rosen
NeuStar, Inc.
470 Conrad Dr
Mars, PA 16046
US
Email: br@brianrosen.net
Rosen Expires January 4, 2010 [Page 6]