IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] Issue#32 status

"Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com> Thu, 20 February 2014 09:00 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 AF0DC1A0049 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 01:00:21 -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 Sknk7GdpvxHr for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 01:00:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E9E71A003D for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 01:00:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id s1K9056P000676 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:00:06 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC001.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.32]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id s1K905qw025514 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:00:05 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC012.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.43) by DEMUHTC001.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:00:04 +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; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:00:04 +0100
From: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com>
To: ext Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com>, "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] Issue#32 status
Thread-Index: Ac8tiAGtvQe9mwQAS968RUS8ackr7wAHlw0AABv/01A=
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:00:03 +0000
Message-ID: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3E8A@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net>
References: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3D63@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <53050FE6.2090800@usdonovans.com>
In-Reply-To: <53050FE6.2090800@usdonovans.com>
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_5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3E8ADEMUMBX014nsnin_"
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: 12736
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1392886808-00003660-1EECB37C/0-0/0-0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/JM6le7euGcHgO1dDEqx0L3ZixZc
Subject: Re: [Dime] Issue#32 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: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:00:21 -0000

Steve,

I'm ok with Unsinged64 but then the second principle that says "...must be  greater ..." needs some enhancements to cover the overflow.

Ulrich





From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Steve Donovan
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 9:11 PM
To: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] Issue#32 status

Ulrich,

See comments inline.

Steve
On 2/19/14 9:33 AM, Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote:
#32: Sequence-Number Time-Stamp values within OC-OLR

I understand that we agreed the following principles:

Sequence-Number is of type Time, however the value need not correspond to the point in time of generation.
SRD> I don't agree that the type should be time.  It should be of type Unsigned64.  A time stamp can be inserted into it but we should not prevent simple sequence numbers.  I agree with the remainder of the statement.


When generated, a new sequence number must be  greater than any sequence number previously generated by the same node (including over a reboot of that node)
SRD> Agreed


When received, a sequence number is used to detect outdates/replays/freshness.
SRD> Agreed


Sequence numbers of expired OLRs MUST NOT be remembered by reacting nodes.
SRD> Agreed



I did not understand the requirement for globally uniqueness as introduced by Jouni.
Can Jouni please explain.

Ulrich







_______________________________________________

DiME mailing list

DiME@ietf.org<mailto:DiME@ietf.org>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email