- From: Bryan Sullivan <blsaws@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:20:19 -0700
- To: public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <BANLkTinON_2C7wDR=TPwPWOjpzWRhzautg@mail.gmail.com>
For further discussion here as desired, points I made today related to the Network Information API (http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/netinfo) discussion: Re roaming, discussions on how to do this over the last 2-3 years (in BONDI and WAC for example), IMO have shown that while "roaming" is not hard to determine (i.e. whether the current network is the home network), the significance of that state is not so clear. The significance, e.g. network usage cost, was one of the drivers for knowing roaming state, with International Roaming the most important state to know (at least for us, as a service provider in North America). But the cost of a network connection is a much more complex thing and depends upon various info not available to the device. So the significance of the network context is not easy to determine reliably. However network type (at least PLMN/WWAN or WIFI/WLAN) and key characteristics (e.g. for PLMN: mcc, mnc) would be useful at least as source info to determine context significance. For example, if those are known, developers could use network APIs to determine the context significance based upon additional information not available to the device (e.g. user account info, data plan, roaming partners and agreements, etc). For WIFI, re ssid and security level (WEP, WPA, etc - really only a boolean is needed): a) ssid as Dom pointed out may be a privacy concern: I am OK with leaving this out since WIFI service usually does not have a usage-based service cost (though there may be caps), as compared to international PLMN roaming. b) security level (boolean) is important as unprotected WIFI network snooping is a key way that info is stolen (e.g. via FireSheep). It would be important (or very useful at least) for apps to know that the network they are using is secure or not, prior to using non-secure network APIs that could expose personal information. Bryan | at&t
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 15:20:49 UTC