[Dime] Issue#31 status

"Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com> Wed, 19 February 2014 14:17 UTC

Return-Path: <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.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 7D2C11A05B6 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 06:17:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] 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 vlqq5SEFvYPV for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 06:17:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E101A0491 for <dime@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 06:17:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id s1JEHBqc002255 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <dime@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:17:11 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.34]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id s1JEH9rp022177 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <dime@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:17:10 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC012.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.43) by DEMUHTC003.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:17:09 +0100
Received: from DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net ([169.254.14.242]) by DEMUHTC012.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.43]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:17:09 +0100
From: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Issue#31 status
Thread-Index: Ac8tfUYIV82WBUGEQQ+YDsLcVKoJfQ==
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:17:09 +0000
Message-ID: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3CF7@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.159.42.126]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3CF7DEMUMBX014nsnin_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 2488
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1392819431-00003660-FBA4AC7B/0-0/0-0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/C3f3hoSlW5A0aH_e0cmKdpBop2I
Subject: [Dime] Issue#31 status
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: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:17:20 -0000

#31: Sending OC-Ongoing-Throttling-Info AVP in request messages that survived a throttling

Dear all,

I did not receive much support for the proposal to define an OC-Ongoing-Throttling-Info AVP in request messages that survived a throttlting.

However, we seem to agree on some principles:

Missing OLR in answer means "no change"; it does not mean "no overload/no throttling requested"

Reporting nodes SHOULD include OLR in every answer that it sends in response to a request message which indicated OLR_DEFAULT_ALGO support unless the reporting node has very good reasons not to do so. Exact wording is not yet agreed.

Ulrich