[Dime] Diameter retransmission -- to use same hop-by-hop and end-to-end IDs?

Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com> Fri, 04 March 2016 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ddolson@sandvine.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 37AB81A6F27 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:55:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 hr3_dWk684FL for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail1.sandvine.com (Mail1.sandvine.com [64.7.137.134]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 780E21A6F1F for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from BLR-EXCHP-2.sandvine.com (192.168.196.172) by WTL-EXCHP-2.sandvine.com (192.168.194.177) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:55:10 -0500
Received: from WTL-EXCHP-2.sandvine.com ([fe80::68ac:f071:19ff:3455]) by blr-exchp-2.sandvine.com ([fe80::6c6d:7108:c63c:9055%14]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:55:15 -0500
From: Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Diameter retransmission -- to use same hop-by-hop and end-to-end IDs?
Thread-Index: AdF2LjriJijEGmCoTaamN5Kg9/9UQA==
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 15:55:10 +0000
Message-ID: <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E9830EB51A2@wtl-exchp-2.sandvine.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.200.63]
x-c2processedorg: b2f06e69-072f-40ee-90c5-80a34e700794
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E9830EB51A2wtlexchp2sandvi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/6VEfcx3iLszOTQkZtSs-v3Lezdc>
Subject: [Dime] Diameter retransmission -- to use same hop-by-hop and end-to-end IDs?
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: <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: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 15:55:13 -0000

Hello Diameter experts,

We've been looking to the specs in order to answer the question as to whether a
retransmitted Diameter request MUST/SHOULD/SHOULD NOT/MAY use the same
hop-by-hop and end-to-end identifiers as the original request.

Can anyone point to the position of the standards, or ad hoc standards in this regard?

A secondary question is whether an agent MUST/SHOULD/SHOULD NOT/MAY
use the same hop-by-hop identifier when forwarding a retransmitted request that it used the
first time the message was seen.
My sense is that an agent is not required to do so, but may it do so?



Thanks in advance,

David Dolson
Senior Software Architect, Sandvine Inc.