[Dime] Proposed REQ 35 Text

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

We had a discussion about whether REQ 35 in the draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs should stay a SHOULD or become a MUST.  We further discussed that any use of a MUST here would require some caveats about what sort of intermediaries could be traversed, and the potential security issues. The chairs directed us to take the discussion to the list due to time constraints. Here's my attempt to do so.

For reference, here's the original text:

> The mechanism SHOULD provide a method for exchanging overload and load information between elements that are connected by intermediaries that do not support the mechanism.
> 

Here's a proposed alternative for changing it to a MUST:

> The mechanism MUST provide a method for exchanging overload and load information between elements that are connected by intermediaries that do not support the mechanism. The mechanism MAY place limitations on the nature of the non-supporting intermediaries that may be traversed. 
> 
> Nothing in this requirement should be construed to relax the security-related requirements elsewhere in this document, in particular REQs 28, 30, and 31. Maliciously constructed overload information can potentially shut down a Diameter network; it's critical that a node be able to confirm that received information came unaltered from an authorized source, whether the information comes from an immediate peer or crosses an intermediary.


Which general approach do people prefer? I kept the security aspects non-normative, since normative text already exists in 28,30, and 31.

Thanks!

Ben.