Re: [Dime] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-drmp-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> Thu, 05 May 2016 12:26 UTC

Return-Path: <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A663B12D51F for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 May 2016 05:26:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=B9J8wjJ4; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=TZH63MEw
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 F3ZTSphOQjxn for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 May 2016 05:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8469912D1C1 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 May 2016 05:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB17C20389 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 May 2016 08:26:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 05 May 2016 08:26:29 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=4KSG9IPt+6PcGWoVM5kPYukja8s=; b=B9J8wj J4lx7fBet5ruVnmOFkJgVagKGLoRoSqhXqHE1RYPnNb4vD6u70DiElzFYL9TbNLx lCxuyaSVoHbTk0NvMsAPV1yX3jzLzcDuKGQhcPjWzbhezI4h5rd+TX0YFZljFwmj qC8p15INi7SyVYs747rTR5IrXYGWs2unaB2jw=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=4KSG9IPt+6PcGWo VM5kPYukja8s=; b=TZH63MEwXUTPbFMRhi0n13oo/uC/Wu3TVQg9KfpnC6xC8GT bAjWRVDqBc1OLmqGSJRfO2yq6CsMQAFgvbFNmyhhjIkl1k7HV2QN0qTcrJrEj/0K DOLipGEri45M3Al4iVyS2PTyoNXxeuIdHJVo08WY7U0TrvKSqUW0PvhAovoA=
Received: by web5.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id B98CEA7A324; Thu, 5 May 2016 08:26:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1462451189.3146285.598954993.20876A3F@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: 7N/ZLJcBIbCtEWe1Wc2UV+qPGTjPSMpr5cjqeC/m+DWO 1462451189
From: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> (IETF), "Gunn, Janet P" <Janet.Gunn@csra.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-140377c4
In-Reply-To: <F0C35A63-ADCA-4502-AC3B-C2DF5FA6EDFD@kuehlewind.net>
References: <20160504111323.8242.20592.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <A8821F45-B9BA-4ACF-8EBF-01B64C100359@fastmail.fm> <B4F433FB-B2A2-4EDA-8ECF-5812BCB7517A@kuehlewind.net> <1462363396.2794286.597809745.0662E7A7@webmail.messagingengine.com> <033661D5-7963-4726-81C0-854E25C659D3@kuehlewind.net> <e6d1ab6472f14ec3b4b6b024563150ff@CSRRDU1EXM025.corp.csra.com> <F0C35A63-ADCA-4502-AC3B-C2DF5FA6EDFD@kuehlewind.net>
Date: Thu, 05 May 2016 13:26:29 +0100
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/_BMqJomxsVrNwnDZhPzuqu1NBP0>
Cc: draft-ietf-dime-drmp@ietf.org, dime-chairs@ietf.org, dime@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_draft-ietf-d?= =?utf-8?q?ime-drmp-05=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 05 May 2016 12:26:32 -0000

Hi Mirja,

On Wed, May 4, 2016, at 04:50 PM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote:
> Hi Janet,
> 
> there are clearly more options than the two mention below.
> 
> E.g. one option is the one explained in my initial comment: hhaving two
> queues, that are both served with a certain rate.
> 
> I’m sure there are more (and potentially more complex) solutions to this
> problem as well.
> 
> Assigning an arbitrary priority is not the right option from my point of
> view and can actually hurt the systems.

Can you please explain? (The default priority is not really arbitrary,
so I want to understand why assigning a value in the middle of the
allowed range is not Ok).

Thank you,
Alexey
 
> Mirja
> 
>  
> > Am 04.05.2016 um 17:45 schrieb Gunn, Janet P <Janet.Gunn@csra.com>om>:
> > 
> > My comment below.
> > Janet
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 10:31 AM
> > To: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
> > Cc: draft-ietf-dime-drmp@ietf.org; dime-chairs@ietf.org; dime@ietf.org; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Dime] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-dime-drmp-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> > 
> > Hi Alexey,
> > 
> > see below.
> > 
> > The point is, if you explicitly indicate that you have a lower priority, you are okay to be starved. However, if you don’t indicate anything (maybe just because you have not been aware that it is possible to do so), you might have the same or even a higher priority, and in this case it’s not okay to be starved.
> > 
> > Mirja
> > <JPG> If a message comes in without a priority, into a system which serves messages based on priority (regardless of the specific mechanisms)you have two options
> > 1- Discard the message (Not a good idea in most systems)
> > 2 - Assign the message an ARBITRARY priority (we call this arbitrary value the "default priority")
> > 
> > You can (and probably will) argue 'til the cows come home on what that arbitrary/default value SHOULD BE.  And different sytems/applications might have different "default values".
> > 
> > But I don't think there should be any argument that, if a message comes in without a priority, you need to assign it a priority.
> > 
> > </JPG>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > DiME mailing list
> > DiME@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> > 
> > This electronic message transmission contains information from CSRA that may be attorney-client privileged, proprietary or confidential. The information in this message is intended only for use by the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you have received this message in error, please contact me immediately and be aware that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. NOTE: Regardless of content, this email shall not operate to bind CSRA to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of email for such purpose.
>