IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] draft-ietf-dime-ovli-01 comment #3

Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Mon, 02 December 2013 13:01 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.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 C44901ADF78 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 05:01:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MANGLED_TOOL=2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 T8q63GSyOO4O for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 05:01:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bk0-x234.google.com (mail-bk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE01F1AE48A for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 05:01:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-bk0-f52.google.com with SMTP id u14so5330656bkz.39 for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 02 Dec 2013 05:01:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=P2mqDaAcBhvCMYOcavNgPUpn4AyCWwmj+dFEcITNvI0=; b=ARwZ7Rua054RsJxxEICeiIKi1lpKehtP4iDiTwir6l2BRhAkCDs3w94SQJFFcTj+Bg 3d/Az6IRCHr9Z26dpRUvhMViVSPhx9rZBmp0VoQC6pMTivivhLOVZV93dqMSBQa0YuDz MGIRXArYTkBNAlslXRe28uW9TdePu1WB+nCVgwOaYiHBE9bYzd+GptQTbQrfB3OInLXy slgUStKebQx0Yp+jcLlJEIt3dNDPufVBYShoXnsBFqG2XKtcXOn7pXxRK1DKsaUWH35V XS+d5fwmkLOt3PyYAa3G1r9Mlats13BJIZnMMlBzkIhHEDNAfvgmZzWY2V+5aFeDkow3 sxXQ==
X-Received: by 10.204.173.139 with SMTP id p11mr461930bkz.67.1385989268940; Mon, 02 Dec 2013 05:01:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:1bc8:101:f101:cc46:9d76:ef6:8824? ([2001:1bc8:101:f101:cc46:9d76:ef6:8824]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id xm9sm18513831bkb.1.2013.12.02.05.01.05 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Dec 2013 05:01:05 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B920972B6E9@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:01:03 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D121BF21-2D16-48C4-BB17-B794BDECD15D@gmail.com>
References: <CC4B7FD8-2E9F-42B5-B05F-6AF0B8DC6739@gmail.com> <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B920972B6E9@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se>
To: Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] draft-ietf-dime-ovli-01 comment #3
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: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 13:01:36 -0000

Hi,

See the pages 9 and 10 (Section 4.2) in the diff pdf I sent recently.

- Jouni


On Dec 2, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Maria Cruz Bartolome <maria.cruz.bartolome@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hello Jouni,
> 
> What do you mean? Are you proposing to change something from 00 to 01? What exactly?
> Best regards
> /MCruz
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jouni Korhonen
> Sent: lunes, 02 de diciembre de 2013 13:28
> To: dime@ietf.org list
> Subject: [Dime] draft-ietf-dime-ovli-01 comment #3
> 
> 
> I brought back the initial features flag for the default abatement algorithm. It was pointed out to me that just the absence of the OC-Feature-Vector AVP is not adequate enough in a case multiple supported abatement algorithms get announced and something specific is needed to be said about the default algorithm (like the other end specifically does not want to use it).
> 
> - Jouni
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email