[Dime] Discussion on draft-ietf-dime-load-02

"Gunn, Janet P" <Janet.Gunn@csra.com> Thu, 21 July 2016 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <Janet.Gunn@csra.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF8FB12B075 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:08:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.187
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pi4I3OkikWQC for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailport7.csra.com (mailport7.csra.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21CA412D579 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from csrrdu1exm030.corp.csra.com (HELO mail.csra.com) ([]) by mailport7.csra.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 21 Jul 2016 10:07:55 -0400
Received: from CSRRDU1EXM025.corp.csra.com ( by CSRRDU1EXM025.corp.csra.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 10:08:06 -0400
Received: from CSRRDU1EXM025.corp.csra.com ([]) by CSRRDU1EXM025.corp.csra.com ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 10:08:06 -0400
From: "Gunn, Janet P" <Janet.Gunn@csra.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Discussion on draft-ietf-dime-load-02
Thread-Index: AdHjV9EenBXE/iQXQzyoamjFUeGPxw==
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:08:06 +0000
Message-ID: <248b648144a14fd4ad5bff65cdc40886@CSRRDU1EXM025.corp.csra.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_248b648144a14fd4ad5bff65cdc40886CSRRDU1EXM025corpcsraco_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/c1Ntw8USm8kEXORdu5Ll_j4SN6U>
Subject: [Dime] Discussion on draft-ietf-dime-load-02
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, 21 Jul 2016 14:08:16 -0000

I do not think I am going to be able to remotely participate in Friday's DIME meeting, but I do want to make a high level  comment on the discussion about draft-ietf-dime-load-02.

A lot of the current discussion seems to be focusing on the best load balancing ALGORITHM, and the right way to calculate the load VALUE.

I think that this ID needs to focus on the means for SHARING load information, without pre-supposing the way in which the "load value" will be used, or how I is caclulated

I suspect that most of the environments in which load balancing will be deployed will be "walled gardens", so there is not an overwhelming need for  nodes in different environments to use the load value in the same way, or even use the same load balancing approach.

I look forward to reading the minutes, and further discussion on line.


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.