IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] Issue#30 status

"Askerup, Anders" <anders.askerup@hp.com> Thu, 27 February 2014 17:15 UTC

Return-Path: <anders.askerup@hp.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 348271A0401 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 09:15:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] 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 SAr-Mp8hCu7o for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 09:15:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from g4t3425.houston.hp.com (g4t3425.houston.hp.com [15.201.208.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 802A21A03AB for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 09:15:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from G9W0364.americas.hpqcorp.net (g9w0364.houston.hp.com [16.216.193.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by g4t3425.houston.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95B68253; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:15:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from G9W3616.americas.hpqcorp.net (16.216.186.51) by G9W0364.americas.hpqcorp.net (16.216.193.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:14:13 +0000
Received: from G9W0747.americas.hpqcorp.net ([169.254.4.56]) by G9W3616.americas.hpqcorp.net ([16.216.186.51]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:14:13 +0000
From: "Askerup, Anders" <anders.askerup@hp.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] Issue#30 status
Thread-Index: AQHPMwYOwHyLYIFFpUiNcO4nB3MBYJrJVwvg
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:14:12 +0000
Message-ID: <602542051F40544EB188D494F506C24947930EA5@G9W0747.americas.hpqcorp.net>
References: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3BCF@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <B5E91287-7462-4531-9F48-C5F124C19BE3@gmail.com> <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3C7A@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <530BA7B6.9020405@usdonovans.com> <8E282417-E73C-4896-BDC0-37B24E709D4B@nostrum.com> <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B48BB@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <530DDF7B.6070801@usdonovans.com> <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B4A05@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <530DE76A.1030305@usdonovans.com> <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B4A31@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <530E04E2.2070405@usdonovans.com> <1A8ECF14-0E9E-41BE-B627-1CE58C0701AA@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <1A8ECF14-0E9E-41BE-B627-1CE58C0701AA@nostrum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [16.210.48.37]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/ez0vCFpehhxOl73-nZpjNYvabJw
Cc: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] Issue#30 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, 27 Feb 2014 17:15:24 -0000

I also agree that including OC-Supported-Features in every answer is preferable. In addition to mirroring Requests, it is in-line with how Supported-Features are managed in at least some 3GPP interfaces as well.

/Anders

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:19 AM
To: Steve Donovan
Cc: dime@ietf.org list
Subject: Re: [Dime] Issue#30 status


On Feb 26, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com> wrote:

> SRD> We don't have consensus yet, but if we agree on the need for reacting nodes to know whether there is support for DOIC in the Diameter network then I think the requirement would be similar to how we are handling overload reports.  The reporting node MUST ensure that all reacting nodes receive the OC-Supported-Features AVP.  This can be done by including the AVP in all answer messages or it can be done by remembering to whom the AVP has been sent.

Given the trivial nature of sending and reading OC-Supported-Features, I think we should put it in every answer. This mirrors the way we handle it in requests.

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
DiME@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email