IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire

Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com> Tue, 11 February 2014 10:24 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 BF58A1A0957 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 02:24:53 -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 Ma4j3pbIFIAT for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 02:24:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D501A093E for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 02:24:50 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f038e000005d01-e4-52f9fa71774f
Received: from ESESSHC012.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id D5.81.23809.17AF9F25; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:24:50 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB101.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.172]) by ESESSHC012.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.54]) with mapi id 14.02.0387.000; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:24:49 +0100
From: Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire
Thread-Index: AQHPJlGIdoxp4ZPGNkCdpdO55KBqgpqvEP0AgADIhpCAAACxkA==
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 10:24:49 +0000
Message-ID: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B9209772E9C@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
References: <057.8b248d3cb5db23879c2730b80d4657d7@trac.tools.ietf.org> <B08CCDA3-4E2B-444A-AE27-9DE2D9C0B458@gmail.com> <4B803326-40A9-4E98-AC12-7DDF46BD101B@nostrum.com> <A9CA33BB78081F478946E4F34BF9AAA014D6979E@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <A9CA33BB78081F478946E4F34BF9AAA014D6979E@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.154]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvjW7Rr59BBh/bBSzm9q5gc2D0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxutVO9kKOoQqemb2MzUw/uLrYuTkkBAwkXjd/IgZwhaTuHBv PVsXIxeHkMAhRomXG+YyQzhLGCV+bj3JCFLFJmAncen0C6YuRg4OEQENiRUnMkHCwgKxEnfP zGEDsUUE4iQef9rPCmE7Sbx/spkJxGYRUJW4tOgL2BheAV+JzrMdYIuFBD4ySuxdLA9icwLF l7y4ClbDCHTQ91NrwHqZBcQlbj2ZzwRxqIDEkj3noY4WlXj5+B8rhK0ksej2Z6h6HYkFuz+x QdjaEssWvmaG2CsocXLmE5YJjKKzkIydhaRlFpKWWUhaFjCyrGJkz03MzEkvN9rECAz7g1t+ q+5gvHNO5BCjNAeLkjjvh7fOQUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmpxYcYmTg4pRoYGR0lF9adUEny ZPHlT9+x8lcKo7WDksz3NkfRNztb8tVz/RZLa/y4YXz/fEWdnBhPU7j1Oj0ZthUGDEftbVac agtPv8mnkVa17AfflOVvdxzOu1lzj0Vgc4+PtbiG6AWn8kkMj1y445bvtdEsz3P55fnzkPxi D5uoywc3hyXZlDfZzv9udUCJpTgj0VCLuag4EQDvuWr7SQIAAA==
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire
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: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 10:24:54 -0000

Ben, Nirav,

I follow same argumentation.
Regards
/MCruz

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Nirav Salot (nsalot)
Sent: martes, 11 de febrero de 2014 11:23
To: Ben Campbell; Jouni Korhonen
Cc: dime@ietf.org list; draft-docdt-dime-ovli@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire

Ben,

I resonate with your thinking below.

Regards,
Nirav.

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 9:54 PM
To: Jouni Korhonen
Cc: dime@ietf.org list; draft-docdt-dime-ovli@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire


On Feb 10, 2014, at 5:16 AM, Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> My reasoning for explicit termination was that knowing the 
> implementation folks they will let overload conditions expire unless advised otherwise.
> And having unnecessary stuff hanging around waiting for a cleanup is 
> not a good thing in general. But I am open here for other options..
> 

I think it's reasonable to say that a reporting node should terminate an overload condition in a timely manner. But if it's about to expire anyway, then expiration might be just as timely as an explicit report. 

And of course, the definition of "timely" is somewhat a matter of policy. For example, I can imagine an deployment that had a large number of clients using fairly short validity durations, and _never_ explicitly signaling an end to an overload condition. This adds a bit of a "slow-start" to the recovery, since different clients will expire the overload condition at different times, and the load will ramp up gradually. I don't see anything wrong with that. Of course, it wouldn't work if one chose long validity durations, or if the signaling of overload to different clients happened in close synchronization.

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
DiME@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
DiME@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email