Re: [Dime] Diameter Group: Type?

[Avi Lior <[e-mail]>]

Well, Lets say you are right.  Don't you think that this is a bit late?

But I don't agree with you that a Group is not a kind of type and hence it could be a basic type (if you get my meaning)

Could you explain why do you think that a flag will simplify parsing?

-- Avi Lior
--Bridgewater Systems


From: Erez Nassimi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 08:51:27 -0500
To: "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [Dime] Diameter Group: Type?

To whom it may concern:
======================

Dealing with the Diameter standard for more than 2 years, I always had the following question, I never dared to ask. But even after 2 years, I do not seem to have a good answer for it:

In RFC 3588, section 4.2 – AVP Data Formats, “Grouped” is defined as a “basic type”. Doesn’t it make more sense to set a flag for Grouped AVP in flags section? Group may be basic but it is not areal type. It’s just an indication of a complex data structure.

If “Grouped” is defined as a flag, it will simplify any parser’s work – and performance is such a rare resource.

Thanks in advance,
Erez Nassimi
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Desk : [phone]
Cell : [phone]
Fax  : [phone]

Did you know…?
With Amdocs’ innovative new “Turbo Charging”<http://www.amdocs.com/Site/News/News+Articles/2008/Press+Releases/Turbo+Charging.htm> complex event processing technology, service providers can process thousands of charging events per CPU in real-time over low-cost hardware (like blade servers), all with the comprehensive functionality of Amdocs CES – Billing 7.5.


This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp