All,

The various versions of the proposed drafts of the PAWS protocol tended to
distinguish between "device location" and "antenna height".

I think we should combine them into a single 3-D location of the radiation
center of (the antenna of) the device.

Does that sound right?

The proposed draft-vchen-paws-protocol-00 defines the following parameters
for location and height:

  latitude
  longitude
  locationUncertainty
  locationConfidence

  height
  heightType
  heightUncertainty

This is very close to the fields  defined by RFC 6225, which has the
parameters:

 latitude
 latitudeUncertainty
 longitude
 longitudeUncertainty
 altitude
 altitudeUncertainty
 altitudeType

Should PAWS reference RFC 6225 and list the following differences?

 - The "altitudeType" should be "above means sea level" (WGS84) or "above
ground", instead of the ones defined in the RFC.

 - Add confidence values along each axis.

If this acceptable, then we can think about defining JSON encoding of RFC
6225 for use by PAWS.

Thanks.

-- 
-vince
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws

Reply via email to