Henning Schulzrinne Hannes Tschofenig Synchronizing Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol based Service Boundaries and Mapping Elements draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-03.txt Henning Schulzrinne Hannes Tschofenig
Main Use Case Sync Mappings Forest Guide Alice Forest Guide Bob
Pull - Functionality getMappingsRequest getMappingsResponse Forest Guide Alice Forest Guide Bob Bob wants the data in this example
Push - Functionality pushMappingsResponse pushMappingsRequest Forest Guide Alice Forest Guide Bob Bob wants the data in this example
getMappingsRequest <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <getMappingsRequest xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:lostsync1"/> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <getMappingsRequest xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:lostsync1"> <exists> <mapping-fingerprint source="authoritative.bar.example" sourceId="7e3f40b098c711dbb6060800200c9a66" lastUpdated="2006-11-01T01:00:00Z"> </mapping-fingerprint> </exists> </getMappingsRequest>
pushMappingsRequest <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <sync:pushMappingsRequest xmlns:sync="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:lostsync1" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:lost1" xmlns:p2="http://www.opengis.net/gml"> <mapping source="authoritative.example" ……
getMappingsRequest, cont. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <getMappingsRequest xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:lostsync1"> <query> <scope source="authoritative.bar.example"/> </query> </getMappingsRequest>
Next Steps Did we address the WGLC feedback appropriately? Is there a way to make the protocol simpler? Does the document need to be “Standards Track”?