Re: [Dime] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-02.txt

Hi Ben, Tom,

That explanatory text helps a lot. I still think REQ 2 should be split into
two requirements though. 

I could not find a definition of "default overload control" in the draft. In
the context of REQ 2, I interpret it as the overload control mechanism
without any application-specific extensions. If I'm right then I think it is
safe to replace it with "the overload control mechanism". If I'm wrong,
"default overload control" needs to be defined.

Could you clarify the difference between the extensibility required by REQ 2
and that required by REQ 34? I assumed the extensibility in REQ 34 was
'application-neutral' but I'd like to confirm.

/Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dime-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Ben Campbell
> Sent: December-19-12 3:16 PM
> To: Tom Taylor
> Cc: dime@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Dime] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dime-overload-
> reqs-02.txt
> 
> WFM
> 
> On Dec 19, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Just a one-word change.
> >
> > On 19/12/2012 1:30 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> >> Hi Tom,
> >>
> >> I think that's on the right track. We've been too focused on
> >> specification impact, when the root of the requirement is really a
> >> combination of application-independent default behavior, along with
> >> extensibility to allow application-specific behavior.
> >>
> >> To put some finer points on it, how's this? I tried to take the
> >> spirit of your proposed text, and added some non-normative
> >> elaboration:
> >>
> >>
> >> The mechanism MUST allow Diameter nodes to support default overload
> >> control regardless of which Diameter applications they support. It
> >> MUST provide sufficient extensibility to allow individual
> >> applications to provide more refined overload control.
> >>
> >> The basic mechanism is intended to be application-independent, that
> >> is, a Diameter node can use it across any existing and future
> >> Diameter applications and expect reasonable results. Certain Diameter
> >> applications might, however, benefit from application-specific
> >> behavior over and above the mechanism's defaults. For example, an
> >> application         might specify relative priorities of
> >              ^^^^^^^^
> >> messages or selection of a specific overload control algorithm.
> >>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime