Re: [Dime] RFC 3588 - fixed positioned session-ID AVPs

["David Lehmann" <[e-mail]>]

Glen,

 

That is not what the spec says.  At least, the wording is not clear and,
IMHO, is misleading.  In which "some message" can the session-id AVP be
in any position?

 

It seems to me that the wording in section 8.8 should be:  "When
present, the Session-Id MUST appear immediately following the Diameter
Header (see Section 3)."

 

--

David Lehmann

Ulticom, Inc.

856-787-2952

 

From: Glen Zorn [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 9:54 AM
To: David Lehmann
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [Dime] RFC 3588 - fixed positioned session-ID AVPs

 

David Lehmann [mailto://[e-mail]]
<mailto:[mailto://[e-mail]%5d>  writes:




Hello,
Hello.
In RFC 3588 (and 3588bis), messages with session IDs are defined with
the session ID AVPs with a fixed position which is immediately following
the header. (e.g. section 8.3.1)  
Yes.
However, this is in contradiction with section 8.8 which states, "When
present, the Session-Id SHOULD appear immediately following the Diameter
Header (see Section 3)."
No.
By using "SHOULD", the spec is stating that the session-ID AVP could be
in any position in the message.

No, it is stating that the AVP could be in any position in some message.
The syntax of the existing messages in RFC 3588 is defined by the
associated BNF and in those messages the Session-Id AVP must immediately
follow the Diameter header.

 

 

Hope this helps.

 

 ~gwz