Re: [Dime] OVLI: clarification in 4.2

["Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi MCruz,

isn't this clause 4.3?

I agree that clarification is needed.
But isn't it so that the OLR contains some explicit information (e.g. the Report-Type) that is not implicitly learned from the encapsulating Diameter message?

My proposal:
The OC-OLR AVP does not contain explicitly all information needed by the reacting node in order to decide whether a subsequent request must undergo a throttling process with the reported percentage. To take this decision the reacting node must check

a)      whether the subsequent request's Application-ID matches the Application-Id received in the OC-OLR AVP's encapsulating answer command;

b)      if the Report-Type received in the OC-ORL is "host"
b1)  whether the subsequent request's Destination Host is present and matches the Origin Host received in the OC-OLR AVP's encapsulating answer command;
if the Report-Type received in the OC-OLR is "realm"
b2) whether the subsequent request' Destination Host is absent and the Destination Realm matches the Origin Realm received in the OC-OLR AVP's  encapsulating answer command;

Best regards
Ulrich



From: DiME [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of ext Maria Cruz Bartolome
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 2:56 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [Dime] OVLI: clarification in 4.2

Hello,

I would like to propose a clarification on 4.2
                ....
   The OC-OLR AVP does not contain explicit information to which
   application it applies to and who inserted the AVP or whom the

   specific OC-OLR AVP concerns to. Both these information is

   implicitly learned from the encapsulating Diameter message/command.

   The application the OC-OLR AVP applies to is the same as the

   Application-Id found in the Diameter message header.  The identity

   the OC-OLR AVP concerns is determined from the Origin-Host AVP found

   from the encapsulating Diameter command.


My understanding is that "who inserted the AVP" cannot always be learned from the encapsulating Diameter message, since "origin-host" may not always contain the host that inserted the OLR.
A part from that, "whom the specific OC-OLR AVP concerns to", could be a bit misleading... "whom" may be host, realm, or any other future ReportType, or even any other "narrowed scope" within the OLR. Last sentence is affected by this ambiguity as well.

Some rephrasing may be considered:
   The OC-OLR AVP does not contain explicit information that may be

   implicitly learned from the encapsulating Diameter message/command.

   The application the OC-OLR AVP applies to is the same as the

   Application-Id found in the Diameter message header. When Report-Type is

   a Destination-Host, the identity

   the OC-OLR AVP concerns is determined from the Origin-Host AVP found

   from the encapsulating Diameter command.


Best regards
/MCruz