Re: [Dime] [dime] #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history

Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com> Wed, 12 February 2014 13:34 UTC

Return-Path: <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.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 BC8491A0990 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:34:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 4E7qkNgeUtfD for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:34:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28D11A098F for <dime@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:34:38 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f038e000005d01-d9-52fb786db253
Received: from ESESSHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id D7.0A.23809.D687BF25; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:34:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB101.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.172]) by ESESSHC003.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.27]) with mapi id 14.02.0387.000; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:34:36 +0100
From: Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] [dime] #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history
Thread-Index: AQHPJ8pHWh6U3x1NsUGCEW0ghWu/OpqxT/wg///7cQCAAB9oIA==
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:34:35 +0000
Message-ID: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B92097745AF@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
References: <075.fdee2d1220a4dd797b0b12767aebd1cf@trac.tools.ietf.org> <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B92097740BB@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <D62D012E-2BDD-42A9-90A5-5E9461E7BF8B@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D62D012E-2BDD-42A9-90A5-5E9461E7BF8B@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.146]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvjW5uxe8gg9anohZze1ewOTB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEr4/eXucwFP9Uq9pz+xN7AuF+ui5GDQ0LARGLiRakuRk4gU0zi wr31bF2MXBxCAocYJRrWL2GCcJYwSnT9XsgCUsUmYCdx6fQLJpBmEQFlidO/HEBMYYFwid61 hSAVIgIREjOvv2CHsJ0k5n6YzgpiswioSix6+JsNxOYV8JWYO38zM8T4vYwS37+tBSviFLCV WLB0JpjNCHTQ91NrmEBsZgFxiVtP5jNBHCogsWTPeWYIW1Ti5eN/rBC2ksSPDZdYIOr1JG5M ncIGYWtLLFv4mhlisaDEyZlPWCYwis5CMnYWkpZZSFpmIWlZwMiyipE9NzEzJ73caBMjMOgP bvmtuoPxzjmRQ4zSHCxK4rwf3joHCQmkJ5akZqemFqQWxReV5qQWH2Jk4uCUamCcz9jEElMp /Vro+TVJ4yuz1Hmtp9gu2Ldv4o+1JVsZUw7VvX2rV/9oxiLJgwa6YgcLF1SlRfnv/bwr9J9h bDXDVV+5/d++z54+q7Zz6uyw9bPF16bta54h0Kq20qvleK3zw9kLf7/QX1EumMvctF8hZdrs zV8m5dUsFU3bvoZdVjPQ7V6W1JmFSizFGYmGWsxFxYkAgTU5bEgCAAA=
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history
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: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:34:50 -0000

Thanks Jouni, I didn't realize.
One more correction added

> Proposal:
> Indicates that the reporting node urges the reacting node to reduce 
> its traffic by a given percentage. For example if the
> reacting node would send 100 packets to the				<---
> reporting node, then a reception of OC-Reduction-Percentage value of 
> 10 would mean that from now on the reacting node MUST only send
> 90 packets instead of 100. How the reacting node achieves the "true       <---
> reduction" transactions leading to the sent request messages is up to 
> the implementation. The reacting node MAY simply drop every 10th 
> packet from its output queue and let the generic application logic try 
> to recover from it.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
Sent: miércoles, 12 de febrero de 2014 10:36
To: Maria Cruz Bartolome
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history


Fine by me.. though you then need to apply the same change to the rest of this paragraph, not only the first one.

Also, please update this additional concern into the issue tracker issue #52.

- Jouni

On Feb 12, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Same comment also applies to following paragraph in 5.5.2
> 
> Now:
>   0 < value < 100
> 
>      Indicates that the reporting node urges the reacting node to
>      reduce its traffic by a given percentage.  For example if the
>      reacting node has been sending 100 packets per second to the
>      reporting node, then a reception of OC-Reduction-Percentage value
>      of 10 would mean that from now on the reacting node MUST only send
>      90 packets per second.  How the reacting node achieves the "true
>      reduction" transactions leading to the sent request messages is up
>      to the implementation.  The reacting node MAY simply drop every
>      10th packet from its output queue and let the generic application
>      logic try to recover from it.0 < value < 100
> 
> Proposal:
> Indicates that the reporting node urges the reacting node to reduce 
> its traffic by a given percentage. For example if the
> reacting node would send 100 packets to the				<---
> reporting node, then a reception of OC-Reduction-Percentage value of 
> 10 would mean that from now on the reacting node MUST only send
> 90 packets per second. How the reacting node achieves the "true 
> reduction" transactions leading to the sent request messages is up to 
> the implementation. The reacting node MAY simply drop every 10th 
> packet from its output queue and let the generic application logic try 
> to recover from it.
> 
> 
> We should not specify a rates for the simple loss algorithm. It's up to the implementation how to reduce, but no time unit has to be specified. 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dime issue tracker [mailto:trac+dime@trac.tools.ietf.org]
> Sent: miércoles, 12 de febrero de 2014 9:13
> To: Maria Cruz Bartolome
> Cc: dime@ietf.org
> Subject: [dime] #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous 
> history
> 
> #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history
> 
> Now (chapter 4.7):
>    The OC-Reduction-Percentage AVP (AVP code TBD8) is type of Unsigned32
>    and describes the percentage of the traffic that the sender is
>    requested to reduce, compared to what it otherwise would have sent.
> 
> Proposal:
> The OC-Reduction-Percentage AVP (AVP code TBD8) is type of Unsigned32  and describes the percentage of the traffic that the sender is  requested to reduce, compared to what it otherwise would send.
> 
> 
> The intention is to avoid that anyone may interpret reacting node is  required to consider history of sent information when throttling.
> 
> --
> -----------------------------------------------+----------------------
> -----------------------------------------------+--
> -----------------------------------------------+---
> Reporter:  maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com  |      Owner:  MCruz
>     Type:  defect                             |  Bartolomé
> Priority:  major                              |     Status:  new
> Component:  draft-docdt-dime-ovli              |  Milestone:
> Severity:  Active WG Document                 |    Version:  1.0
>                                               |   Keywords:
> -----------------------------------------------+----------------------
> -----------------------------------------------+--
> -----------------------------------------------+---
> 
> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/trac/ticket/52>
> dime <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime