Re: [Dime] OVLI: comments to 4.5

"Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com> Fri, 06 December 2013 14:39 UTC

Return-Path: <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.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 F3EA01AD83F for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 06:39:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
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 Ll8IKlHyjntD for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 06:39:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7C811ADFE2 for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 06:39:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id rB6Ed76d017444 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 15:39:07 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id rB6Ed7CO003623 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 15:39:07 +0100
Received: from DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net ([169.254.14.152]) by DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 15:39:07 +0100
From: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: OVLI: comments to 4.5
Thread-Index: Ac7x065WBGZ2oIAhQo2K4GQZ6Z6CDAAu0f4w
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 14:39:06 +0000
Message-ID: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D90006681519DD6B@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.159.42.117]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D90006681519DD6BDEMUMBX014nsnin_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 4550
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1386340747-000030AF-CD344E5E/0-0/0-0
Subject: Re: [Dime] OVLI: comments to 4.5
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, 06 Dec 2013 14:39:16 -0000

Dear all,

here is another comment to 4.5:

3. It may be worth to clarify the meaning of a validity duration of 0 seconds. In my understanding it does not mean that the encapsulating OC-OLR is invalid. It is valid (and therefore replaces any previous OLR with the same report-type), but it immediately expires and hence is a way to signal "end of overload".


Best regards
Ulrich
_____________________________________________
From: Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 5:05 PM
To: 'dime@ietf.org';
Subject: OVLI: comments to 4.5


Dear all,

here are comments to clause 4.5:

1. (linked to a previous comment to 4.3) The first sentence should be modified to read

   The OC-Validity-Duration AVP (AVP code TBD4) is type of Unsigned32
   and describes the number of seconds the OC-OLR AVP and its content is
   valid since the creation of the OC-OLR AVP (as indicated by the
   OC-TimeStamp AVP).

2. A default value of 5 seconds does not make much sense when the Reduction-Percentage is absent or takes the value 0. Proposal is to modify text as follows:

   The default value for the OC-Validity-Duration AVP value is 5 (i.e. 5 seconds).  When the OC-Validity-
   Duration AVP is not present in the OC-OLR AVP, the default value applies, unless the Reduction-Percentage AVP
   is absent or takes the value 0, in which cases the validity is unlimited.


Best regards
Ulrich