[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Proposal to extend the EDXL TargetArea to allow more flexibletargeting/filtering/content routing
Folks, In my first iteration of implementing EDXL for satellite and edge network delivery of EDXL messages, I came across some potential problems during the use case scenario/planning stages. This is a proposal to add an element to correct these issues. To start off, I need to point out that this issue is not specific to my implementation. So, following, my proposal to add an element to resolve this issue, starting with the definition of the distribution element from the current EDXL draft: "The EDXL Distribution Element (DE) comprises a <Distribution> element as described hereafter, optional <targetArea> elements describing geospatial or political target area for message delivery, and a set of <messageElement> elements each containing specific information regarding a particular item of content, which it includes within a <contentObject> structure. The included content may be any XML or other file or document." By definition of the above, the targetArea elements are to be used to target message delivery. The current targetArea elements include: circle, polygon, country, primaryJuristiction, and secondaryJurisdiction. However, how do we deliver messages to devices that cannot make use of geo-spatial targeting? (the remaining fields are not granular enough for targeting) --- A little explanation on one-way network data delivery: All edge network, terrestrial, and satellite one-way receiver devices make use of a unique and/or group identifier to receive and filter data. This is either a system-specific ID, their MAC address, a fixed PID, a port number, or some form of 'target' name. This is done because it is the most optimum method of filtering traffic over a one-way network (since the ID can reside on the device's firmware and/or be inserted into the headers of the packet payloads). In most cases any of these lower-level device characteristics are abstracted by use of a generic device identifier. Directv, Echostar, Loral, Sky,... all utilize this mechanism as a base for addressing devices, tied directly to Subscriber Management and Data Delivery servers, and indirectly to Conditional Access systems. So there is, as I see it, a problem here with delivery of messages to target areas for these devices and networks - being that they cannot make use of the existing fields in the targetArea block, and cannot perform geo-location resolution. --- So, possible solutions: "use the keyword or recipientAddress which reside in the distribution block" - The first issue with using either of these fields is that it does not mesh with the definition of the EDXL distribution element, since in essence this equates to using non-targetarea sections of the specification for targetArea-related use. - The second issue is that the targeted receiver device may not be the recipient of the message. Take for example a satellite distribution mechanism that feeds a local area network via a satellite edge router. This is an intermediary recipient. The edge router must be targeted, because one cannot target the tertiary devices as we don't know what they are. There is a hand-off between the satellite and local networks, the two have no connection, and as such the satellite delivery system must be able to deliver messages to its edge receivers. Using the recipientAddress or keyword field once again defeats the purpose of the targetArea, and also leads to one having 'non-final-recipient recipients', which no doubt will cause content routing issues. In conclusion, using these fields doesn't seem like the correct approach, but more like a quick-fix solution where a field not intended for targetArea use is being used for precisely that. Which adds ambiguity to the spec and could lead to significant routing issues in 2 +hop networks. --- A proposal to fix this issue: - targetArea is the correct area to use for targeting, and as such should support more generic reception and high-level routing of data. - when delivering data over a network that cannot support geo-location lookup and makes use of group/device targeting and hand-off between multiple networks, the server must add an additional targetArea element to the EDXL message, while still retaining the original targetArea blocks (these may contain geographical targeting information), thus allowing final recipients that can perform geographical lookup to filter their data. - in order to prevent device/network-specific implementations and non-interoperability, the identifier (maybe identifier isn't the correct keyword to use) block should appear as follows: <targetArea> <identifier> <keyword> <valueListUrn>valueListUrn<./valueListURN> <value>value<./value> <./keyword> <./identifier> <./targetArea> where the identifier block occurs 0..n with 1..n keyword blocks or <targetArea> <identifier> <valueListUrn>valueListUrn<./valueListURN> <value>value<./value> <./identifier> <./targetArea> where the identifier block occurs 0..n With the above mechanism, the proposed identifier block can be used to enable one-way delivery targeting of messaging when using edge devices and content filtering hubs, be this over terrestrial, satellite, or cable IP delivery networks. It would also support filtering and hand-off across multiple vendors using non-compatible multi-hop networks, since non-compatible networks can make use of the Urn/value elements, keeping the EDXL content abstracted from multi-hop interoperability issues. Cheers Kon
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]