[Dime] Issue #23 - Proposed resolution

[Steve Donovan <[e-mail]>]

Issue @23 points out that there are two interpretations of the realm 
overload report in the current text.  One implies that a realm report 
applies to all requests sent to the realm, the other implies that it 
only applies to requests sent to the realm that does not contain a 
destination-host AVP.

I believe we have consensus to use the second definition.

There was also a proposal, made by me, to change the name of the report 
to something like "realm-routed-request" to be more accurate in defining 
what the scope of the overload report.  I no longer think this is 
necessary and am happy with the "realm" name for the report.

If we have agreement on the direction then I will identify the text that 
needs to be changed to remove the conflicting definitions of the report 
type.  I will send it to the list for review before incorporating it 
into the -04 version of the draft and closing the issue.

Please let me know if there are issues with this proposal.

Regards,

Steve