IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] Issue#35 conclusion

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Fri, 21 February 2014 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B181A026F for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 12:18:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xTgO63mKOgi0 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 12:18:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74AD71A0242 for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 12:18:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.1.29] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s1LKI2Pg062173 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:18:04 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <53077659.1030909@usdonovans.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:18:02 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6D78C2FB-F3A0-4BC5-BEC4-79D8920EE710@nostrum.com>
References: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3F63@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <77A3D88E-DDC7-494A-8357-C0F8594A6310@nostrum.com> <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B4177@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <53077659.1030909@usdonovans.com>
To: Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.172.146.58 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/-c1lalh1YsE3hivu25HkGqadoAo
Cc: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] Issue#35 conclusion
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime/>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 20:18:09 -0000

On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:52 AM, Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com> wrote:

> My other concern is that this puts a lot of extra onus on the agent even for the case where the reporting node does not want to differentiate overload reports.  To this end I suggest we add an indication in the OLR marking the reports that are specific to just the Origin-Host in the request.  Absence of the "single-client-only" AVP would mean that the report applies to all clients.  Presence of the AVP would indicate that the OLR applies to the Origin-Host.

I support this approach. And of course, being me, I would like that AVP to contain the Diameter Identity of the client in question.

But I wonder--should this be limited to clients? Should it be possible for the server to bind an OLR to a particular _agent_? That is, some node on the message path that is not the Origin-Host? For adjacent agents, this is easy--the server only sends the OLR to that agent. But that won't work for non-adjacent agents.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email