Re: [Dime] Snapshot of -02 version of DOIC draft

[Steve Donovan <[e-mail]>]

Maria Cruz,

I updated the text based on what was put in the issue tracker when you
closed the issue.

Are you suggesting that this issue needs to be re-opened so we can
discuss whether OC-Supported-Features is needed in mid-session requests?

Steve

On 3/11/14 7:06 AM, Maria Cruz Bartolome wrote:
>
> Hello Steve,
>
>  
>
> According to conclusion on #Issue 51: OC-Supported-Feature AVP MUST be
> included in all request messages sent by a DOIC supporting node. (not
> yet agreed).
>
>  
>
> Text marked in green below requires updates:
>
>  
>
> 5.3.1.  Reacting Node Endpoint Considerations
>
>  
>
>    The basic principle is that the request message initiating endpoint
>
>    (i.e. the "reacting node") announces its support for the overload
>
>    control mechanism by including in the request message the OC-
>
>    Supported-Features AVP with those capabilities it supports and is
>
>    willing to use for this Diameter session (or transaction in a case of
>
>    a non-session state maintaining applications, see Section 3.1.2 for
>
>    more details on Diameter sessions).  It is RECOMMENDED that the
>
>    request message initiating endpoint includes the capability
>
>    announcement into every request regardless it has had prior message
>
>    exchanges with the give remote endpoint.  In a case of a Diameter
>
>    session maintaining application, sending the OC-Supported-Features
>
>    AVP in every message is not really necessary after the initial
>
>    capability announcement or until there is a change in supported
>
>    features.
>
>  
>
>    Once the endpoint that initiated the request message receives an
>
>    answer message from the remote endpoint, it can detect from the
>
>    received answer message whether the remote endpoint supports the
>
>    overload control solution and in a case it does, what features are
>
>    supported.  The support for the overload control solution is based on
>
>    the presence of the OC-Supported-Features AVP in the Diameter answer
>
>    for existing application.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Best regards
>
> /MCruz
>
>  
>
> *From:*DiME [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Steve Donovan
> *Sent:* sábado, 08 de marzo de 2014 12:19
> *To:* [e-mail]
> *Subject:* [Dime] Snapshot of -02 version of DOIC draft
>
>  
>
> All,
>
> I have made updates to the -02 version of the DOIC draft based on
> resolution to the following issues:
>
> 24, 32, 50, 51, 52, 47 and 37
>
> I had also started to make updates for issues 29, 31 and 34 before we
> agreed that the proposed text needs to be updated in the issue tracker
> before the edits are made.  I'll clean up these updates when we have
> the wording put into issue tracker.
>
> To those who own issues in issue tracker, if we have resolution of the
> issue on the mailing list please update issue tracker ASAP so the
> edits can be put into the -02 draft.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
>