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

Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com> Fri, 21 February 2014 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <srdonovan@usdonovans.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 9155E1A0316 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:37:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.12
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.12 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no
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 4PgbTvqRBZ5O for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:36:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from biz131.inmotionhosting.com (biz131.inmotionhosting.com [173.247.247.114]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B68BE1A01B7 for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:36:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cpe-76-187-100-94.tx.res.rr.com ([76.187.100.94]:54899 helo=SDmac.local) by biz131.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <srdonovan@usdonovans.com>) id 1WGs9i-0006Mf-1l for dime@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 07:36:54 -0800
Message-ID: <53077290.8080501@usdonovans.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:36:48 -0600
From: Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dime@ietf.org
References: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B9209784017@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B9209784017@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040509040706040808000208"
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz131.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - usdonovans.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: biz131.inmotionhosting.com: authenticated_id: srdonovan@usdonovans.com
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/AJG93XT-L1mqN9DAGEVTKWQaUwk
Subject: Re: [Dime] #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history - conclusion
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: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:37:01 -0000

Maria Cruz,

I support your suggested changes.  I have one further suggested change
below.

Steve

On 2/21/14 2:40 AM, Maria Cruz Bartolome wrote:
> #52: Throttling not needed to be based on previous history
>  
> Following agreement is reached:
>
>  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.                  <----
>  
>  
>  Now (chapter 5.5.2):
>       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 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.
SRD> Replace "from now on" in the above with "for the period that the
overload report is active"
>
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>