IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-drmp-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> Wed, 04 May 2016 06:47 UTC

Return-Path: <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720AD12D1BF for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2016 23:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=E+2OA9K+; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=g/gobEXA
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 8VPTooaVlLX1 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2016 23:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2F1D12D1BD for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 May 2016 23:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 020EA20DF7 for <dime@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 May 2016 02:47:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 04 May 2016 02:47:45 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=fet3lAla0yWDxpOGZh6RQ4wj7Bc=; b=E+2OA9 K+wDOBgyIN3e9U1vv9D6LAO/VIKlndcIJOzoFFmIJlaHQaYsISS+UpJP+Uv3sZl1 br8LlWmU/uMA6vnekJb9djqnrhqZpnogYBWZpnjolbO0+HtjrHZhGD/5nPUu7jdk xDETdUdCfqKiOvDkOquROZ4oyPL8h1mgBfR+I=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=fet3lAla0yWDxpO GZh6RQ4wj7Bc=; b=g/gobEXAqHLcpygP0RD2AtGlWO1Fv+VOKPu0M/YmioJ0SEC 54qI0QrJCfFL43fJVjGIwLX1wpXvdbJ9/R1sutE8t+9B4O305hegIVvcFLPBT6tg Jx1B+y8KlD2KRAVLeMCmsUb2KGsEtxYb1j3D2qr7jx5OSsqjsmT31L9Q6Ies=
X-Sasl-enc: s3WQNZhkLIhz/fFxQAGkmaizhIw6VEZ3blyxBwSqCZWI 1462344464
Received: from [192.168.0.15] (cpc5-nmal20-2-0-cust24.19-2.cable.virginm.net [92.234.84.25]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8CAC26801C0; Wed, 4 May 2016 02:47:44 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13E238)
In-Reply-To: <20160503213139.8362.8871.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 07:52:55 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FC657E68-36EA-4D7F-959F-1ED3668F1B87@fastmail.fm>
References: <20160503213139.8362.8871.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/4SaUK47rE0PYY0bfT1q6KLru6lM>
Cc: draft-ietf-dime-drmp@ietf.org, dime-chairs@ietf.org, dime@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-drmp-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 04 May 2016 06:47:52 -0000

Hi Alissa,

> On 3 May 2016, at 22:31, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:
> 
> (3) Section 8 says: 
> 
>    "Diameter nodes SHOULD use the PRIORITY_10 priority as this default
> value."
> 
> If the determination of the priority schemes are all
> application-specific, how is it appropriate for this spec to define what
> the default priority should be for all applications? Shouldn't
> applications specify their own defaults?

I think it is perfectly acceptable for this spec to recommend a default in the middle of the allowed range. I read this as a requirement on application policies. I think it would be bad if different applications pick different values as the default, as this would be confusing to implementors and deployers.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email