Re: [Dime] Conclusion for the Report Type

"TROTTIN, JEAN-JACQUES (JEAN-JACQUES)" <jean-jacques.trottin@alcatel-lucent.com> Mon, 16 December 2013 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <jean-jacques.trottin@alcatel-lucent.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 06A651AE01E for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 06:36:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] 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 I8XM7xquotii for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 06:36:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com (ihemail4.lucent.com [135.245.0.39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80E81ADF76 for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 06:36:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-42.lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id rBGEaJrd014001 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 08:36:20 -0600 (CST)
Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id rBGEaIGY028405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 15:36:18 +0100
Received: from FR712WXCHMBA12.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.8.241]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 15:36:18 +0100
From: "TROTTIN, JEAN-JACQUES (JEAN-JACQUES)" <jean-jacques.trottin@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] Conclusion for the Report Type
Thread-Index: AQHO9NZTfmjwZl8bgUqgMbcmsBQ2dppM0z6AgAAtMICACeu/gA==
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:36:18 +0000
Message-ID: <E194C2E18676714DACA9C3A2516265D201CB5730@FR712WXCHMBA12.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D90006681519DCBC@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <453156F8-9090-46D4-BF8E-A877F40EE3AC@gmail.com> <A9CA33BB78081F478946E4F34BF9AAA014D2D959@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com> <2B4A6453-CBF0-48BE-B917-96B279229D3C@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2B4A6453-CBF0-48BE-B917-96B279229D3C@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.41]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.39
Subject: Re: [Dime] Conclusion for the Report Type
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, 16 Dec 2013 14:36:25 -0000

Hi Jouni

I am also fine for the statements you proposed.

My understanding for 4) about instances is the following 
- when an OLR with host report type is present in a message; it is the only OLR instance with this report type
- same for OLR with a realm report type
- but you may have an OLR host report type and another OLR with realm report type in the same message.

Is my understanding correct?

Best regards 

JJacques 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Jouni Korhonen
Envoyé : mardi 10 décembre 2013 08:57
À : Nirav Salot
Cc : dime@ietf.org list
Objet : Re: [Dime] Conclusion for the Report Type


On Dec 10, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Nirav Salot (nsalot) <nsalot@CISCO.COM>; wrote:

> Jouni,
> 
> I am fine with the principles you have mentioned below for Report Type.
> I also prefer to use enumerated type for this AVP if that does not risk the extendibility of this AVP.
> 


Ok. Good.

- Jouni


> Regards,
> Nirav.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jouni Korhonen
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013 5:30 PM
> To: dime@ietf.org list
> Subject: [Dime] Conclusion for the Report Type
> 
> Folks,
> 
> We need a conclusion here so that I can actually write something into the -01. How about the following (I try to reflect as many points given here as possible):
> 
> 1) The basic principle for the Report Type use is that only one
>   OLR per report type is allowed unless the report type and the
>   OLR reflecting the new report type define exact semantics how
>   to differentiate between multiple OLRs with the same report
>   type. In 3GPP context, for example, a report type with an AVP
>   that identifies an APN could be such a differentiator.. and that
>   would need a new report type where an implementation exactly
>   knows to look for this additional AVP without guesswork or 
>   fuzzy heuristics.
> 
> 2) A new report type or a set of new report types require a new
>   feature to be allocated/defined so that both endpoints know how
>   to handle the new report type that was defined after the
>   publication of the baseline specification. The handling of the
>   new report types must be defined (along with the new AVPs it
>   might need to be included into the OC-OLR AVP).
> 
> 3) With 2) in place I do not care whether the OC-Report-Type is
>   enumerated or unsigned (flag vector?). I still favour Enumerated
>   myself as it forces the protocol designer to come up with a 
>   cleaner design ;)
> 
> 4) For the baseline we only define host and realm report types.
>   We do not allow multiple OLRs with these report types i.e.
>   single instances of OLRs with host and/or realm are allowed.
>  
> - 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