[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]
Versions: 00
Geopriv J. Winterbottom
Internet-Draft M. Thomson
Intended status: Best Current Andrew Corporation
Practice November 9, 2007
Expires: May 12, 2008
Using HELD for Inter-LIS Communication
draft-winterbottom-geopriv-held-lis2lis-bcp-00.txt
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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 May 12, 2008.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
Abstract
This document describes how HELD can be used to support LIS to LIS
communication.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Detailed Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 15
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
1. Introduction
The LIS to LIS communication requirements
[I-D.winterbottom-geopriv-lis2lis-req] describe the need in some
network environements for one LIS to consult another LIS in order to
determine the location of a Device. This document describes how HELD
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery] in conjunction with the
HELD identity extensions
[I-D.winterbottom-geopriv-held-identity-extensions] and the HELD
measurements specification [I-D.thomson-geopriv-held-measurements]
can be used to satisfy these requirements. No new schema is
introduced by this document, recipes using existing specifications
are described.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
2. Terminology
The key conventions and terminology used in this document are defined
as follows:
This document reuses the terms Target, as defined in [RFC3693].
This document uses the term Location Information Server, LIS, is used
as defined in [I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps].
Basic terms from the HELD specification
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery] are also reused.
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].
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
3. Overview
The network scenario described in
[I-D.winterbottom-geopriv-lis2lis-req] shows that in some
environments the LIS publically associated with a Device cannot, on
its own, determine the location of the Device. HELD provides a
specification allowing a Device to obtain location information from a
Location Information Server (LIS). This specification extends HELD
by chaining a location request from the publically accessible LIS to
a LIS controlled by a regional access provider. The publically
accessible LIS can also add measured and identity parameters relating
to the Device in the HELD locationRequest made to the access provider
LIS. Resuing HELD in this manner reduces the number of protocols
that need to be supported on a LIS, it simplfies development, reduces
complexity, and improves interoperability.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
4. Detailed Description
In a typical environment using HELD, the Target discovers the LIS
using one of the methods described in
[I-D.thomson-geopriv-lis-discovery], and makes a request for location
information. The ISP LIS receives the location request from the
Target, adds additional information, and then sends the location
request on to the regional access provider LIS. The regional access
provider LIS uses the extra information provided in the ISP LIS to
determine the location of the Device and provide the PIDF-LO
[RFC4119] in the requested form.
The ISP LIS will, in many cases creates the identity used in the
"pres" field of the PIDF-LO. This value needs to be conveyed from
the ISP LIS to the regional access provider LIS. HELD can convey
this value using a URI identity extension as described in
[I-D.winterbottom-geopriv-held-identity-extensions].
The ISP LIS may need to provide Device network attachment
information, in the form of measurements, to the regional access
provider LIS to aid it in determing the Device's location. A
comprehensive set of measurements and how they are used is provided
in [I-D.thomson-geopriv-held-measurements]. HELD supports the
inclusion of these additional elements without modification.
The ISP LIS should not send a request for a location URI to the
regional access provider LIS. This is because the regional access
provider LIS is, in most cases, invisible to entities other than the
ISP LIS. A location URI contains the hostname of the LIS that will
service a location request, which is the ISP LIS and not the regional
access provider LIS. Consequently only the ISP LIS should create
location URIs for the Device. A regional access provider LIS
receiving a request for a location URI from an ISP LIS should respond
with a "cannotProvideLiType" error.
The ISP LIS should pass all elements included in the Device's
location request to the regional access provider LIS, with the
exception of a request for a location URI which was described in the
previous paragraph. This behaviour ensures that any new options made
available to the LIS through HELD can be supported without
necessarily requiring changes to the ISP LIS.
The ISP LIS should provide usage in any returned location object that
match the user's desired settings, or in the absence of these, the
default settings for <retransmission-allowed> and <retension-expiry>
as applied by the ISP LIS.
Basic HELD is provided with an HTTP binding, which is suitable for
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
the application of a Device requesting its own location. Where a
nailed up connection between two entities and continual transaction
streaming is required, HTTP may be less appropriate. In this
configuration an alternative transport, such as BEEP
[I-D.thomson-geopriv-held-beep], may be used.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
5. Examples
In this example a DSL service is provided with an L2TP tunnel forming
the link between the BRAS in the regional access provider's network,
and the NAS in the ISP. The Device has requested a civic location.
The resulting location request sent from the ISP LIS to the regional
access provider LIS is shown in Figure 1.
<locationRequest
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:geopriv:held" responseTime="8">
<locationType>civic</locationType>
<heldDevice xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:geopriv:held:id">
<uri type="presentity">pres:3sijsskcknckj@ls.example.com</uri>
</heldDevice>
<measurements xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:geopriv:held:lm">
<dsl>
<l2tp>
<src>192.0.2.10</src>
<dest>192.0.2.61</dest>
<session>528</session>
</l2tp>
</dsl>
</measurements>
</locationRequest>
Figure 1: LIS to LIS Location Request with L2TP Measurements
The regional access provider LIS would use the L2TP tunnel
information to establish the location of the Device. It would then
create a PIDF-LO using the URI specified as a <heldDevice> as the
presentity value. The resulting location response from the access
provider LIS to the ISP LIS may look something similar to Figure 2.
On receiving this response the ISP LIS will need to add the usage
rules specified by the Device or use local defaults if no Device
instructions are available.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
<locationResponse xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:geopriv:held">
<presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf"
entity="pres:3sijsskcknckj@ls.example.com">
<tuple id="3b650sf789nd">
<status>
<geopriv xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10">
<location-info>
<ca:civicAddress
xmlns:ca="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10:civicAddr"
xml:lang="en-au">
<ca:country>AU</ca:country>
<ca:A1>NSW</ca:A1>
<ca:A3>Wollongong</ca:A3>
<ca:A4>Gwynneville</ca:A4>
<ca:STS>Northfield Avenue</ca:STS>
<ca:LMK>University of Wollongong</ca:LMK>
<ca:FLR>2</ca:FLR>
<ca:NAM>Andrew Corporation</ca:NAM>
<ca:PC>2500</ca:PC>
<ca:BLD>39</ca:BLD>
<ca:SEAT>WS-183</ca:SEAT>
<ca:POBOX>U40</ca:POBOX>
</ca:civicAddress>
</location-info>
</usage-rules>
</geopriv>
</status>
<timestamp>2007-10-31T03:42:28+00:00</timestamp>
</tuple>
</presence>
</locationResponse>
Figure 2: Regional Access Provider LIS Response
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
6. Security Considerations
A strong trust relationship needs to exist between the ISP and the
regional access provider in order for this type of access network to
operate successfully. Since this document describes the exchange of
Device location information between two trusted parties it does not
mandate the use of any specific crypto techniques but recommends the
use of TLS with client-side and server-side certificates for
authentication.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
7. IANA Considerations
There are no IANA considerations for this document.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
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.
[RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000.
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery]
Barnes, M., Winterbottom, J., Thomson, M., and B. Stark,
"HTTP Enabled Location Delivery (HELD)",
draft-ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery-02 (work in
progress), September 2007.
[I-D.winterbottom-geopriv-lis2lis-req]
Winterbottom, J. and S. Norreys, "LIS to LIS Protocol
Requirements", draft-winterbottom-geopriv-lis2lis-req-00
(work in progress), June 2007.
[I-D.winterbottom-geopriv-held-identity-extensions]
Winterbottom, J. and M. Thomson, "HELD Device identity
Extensions",
draft-winterbottom-geopriv-held-identity-extensions-03
(work in progress), October 2007.
[I-D.thomson-geopriv-held-measurements]
Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Using Device-provided
Location Measurements in HELD",
draft-thomson-geopriv-held-measurements-00 (work in
progress), October 2007.
8.2. Informative references
[RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object
Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.
[RFC3693] Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, J., and
J. Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693, February 2004.
[I-D.thomson-geopriv-held-beep]
Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "A BEEP Binding for the
HELD Protocol", draft-thomson-geopriv-held-beep-00 (work
in progress), February 2007.
[I-D.thomson-geopriv-lis-discovery]
Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Discovering the Local
Location Information Server (LIS)",
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
draft-thomson-geopriv-lis-discovery-03 (work in progress),
September 2007.
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps]
Tschofenig, H. and H. Schulzrinne, "GEOPRIV Layer 7
Location Configuration Protocol; Problem Statement and
Requirements", draft-ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps-05 (work in
progress), September 2007.
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
Authors' Addresses
James Winterbottom
Andrew Corporation
PO Box U40
University of Wollongong, NSW 2500
AU
Email: james.winterbottom@andrew.com
Martin Thomson
Andrew Corporation
PO Box U40
University of Wollongong, NSW 2500
AU
Email: martin.thomson@andrew.com
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft LIS to LIS BCP November 2007
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Winterbottom & Thomson Expires May 12, 2008 [Page 15]
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/