Re: [Dime] OVLI: OC-Validity-Duration

Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com> Thu, 12 December 2013 16:38 UTC

Return-Path: <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.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 D4D9E1AE35D for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:38:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 lOWXB4eOddSK for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:38:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg20.ericsson.net (sesbmg20.ericsson.net [193.180.251.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC80B1AE35B for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:38:24 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb38-b7f2c8e000006d25-e9-52a9e67adde6
Received: from ESESSHC009.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by sesbmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 04.6A.27941.A76E9A25; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:38:18 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB101.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.197]) by ESESSHC009.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.45]) with mapi id 14.02.0347.000; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:38:17 +0100
From: Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com>
To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] OVLI: OC-Validity-Duration
Thread-Index: Ac73DRNgVjMdaw2ATnC3EBEvo4YB4gAABXsAABLFinA=
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:38:16 +0000
Message-ID: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B920973AF29@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
References: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B920973AB4B@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <E8A3170E-3C42-4506-A22D-B947B2D03E54@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E8A3170E-3C42-4506-A22D-B947B2D03E54@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.148]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW7Vs5VBBrefC1vM7V3BZrF/XQOT A5PHzll32T2WLPnJFMAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJVx79FT9oINvBWnTro0MD7k6mLk5JAQMJE4 uukLK4QtJnHh3nq2LkYuDiGBI4wS7Q82MYEkhASWMEp0bkkDsdkE7CQunX4BFOfgEBHQlli+ QQwkzCygLDF7xwN2kLCwgJ7E7UP6IGERAX2JTRMusEBUW0ksWe4NEmYRUJV4uOES2HBeAV+J Pws/MENsbWCU+D3pIxtIglPAVqJzz12wIkag076fWsMEsUpc4taT+UwQJwtILNlznhnCFpV4 +fgf1CtKEo1LnrBC1OtILNj9iQ3C1pZYtvA1M8RiQYmTM5+wTGAUm4Vk7CwkLbOQtMxC0rKA kWUVI0dxanFSbrqRwSZGYHwc3PLbYgfj5b82hxilOViUxHk/vnUOEhJITyxJzU5NLUgtii8q zUktPsTIxMEp1cCYaaxZd8Aq5v13X8b1K6epHDb+u6xfZWpd+oL5zuI+sf71frJhNgd1pxt/ WBe9cH5lv7Prg6VvlZf33Di9a/nZfw/60z0W6d39wH9KVFMjMtszY9nLzzkx7XyqPjqC3hMP qMw6xVA88epSy0P5537/VPeo2ndOZ/MsGZNz5x9Mlb7NyL/JVDxXiaU4I9FQi7moOBEAt7Ur 6l0CAAA=
Cc: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] OVLI: OC-Validity-Duration
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, 12 Dec 2013 16:38:28 -0000

Jouni,

I think the best way to manage "something unpredictable" is not to provide an estimation (on an unpredictable event) from the server.
If you really think that scheduled cleanups are helpful, this could always be considered in the client, with a default value, that does not need to be sent from the reporting node.

Regards
/MCrzu

-----Original Message-----
From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
Sent: jueves, 12 de diciembre de 2013 9:39
To: Maria Cruz Bartolome
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] OVLI: OC-Validity-Duration

Hi,

I kind of like scheduled cleanups.. just to make sure there is no
stuff left hanging around when something unpredictable happens in
the network system.

Again, I would say this is a wrong place to "optimize".


- Jouni

On Dec 12, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com>; wrote:

> Dear all,
>  
> I would like to reconsider the real need for the OC-Validity-Duration AVP to be included into overload report.
> Overload mechanism is being design with a principle in mind: as soon as reporting node determines a reacting node overload behavior should change, reporting node sends a fresh overload report to this reacting node.
> Therefore, latest overload report received will be always applicable until a new report is received, and then I do not see the value, but just complexity, of including a Duration in the report.
>  
> Let me know your views.
> Best regards
> /MCruz
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime