Re: [Dime] [dime] #44 (draft-docdt-dime-ovli): Incorrect sequence number behavior

[Steve Donovan <[e-mail]>]

All,

When looking to make the change documented below, I realized that this
wording had already been changed as a result of a previous agreed to
change.  I haven't searched down which one, but the new wording in the
current -02 snapshot is as following.  I believe that this is consistent
with the proposed wording below and, as such, have not further updated
the paragraph.

If the value of the OC-Sequence-Number AVP contained in the received
   OC-OLR AVP is equal to or less than the value stored in an existing
   overload condition state, the received OC-OLR AVP SHOULD be silently
   discarded.  If the value of the OC-Sequence-Number AVP contained in
   the received OC-OLR AVP is greater than the value stored in an
   existing overload condition state or there is no previously recorded
   sequence number, the reacting node MUST update the overload condition
   state associated with the realm or the specific node is the realm.

Regards,

Steve
On 3/24/14 3:17 PM, dime issue tracker wrote:
> #44: Incorrect sequence number behavior
>
> Changes (by [e-mail]):
>
>  * status:  new => closed
>  * resolution:   => fixed
>
>
> Comment:
>
>  Change the last sentence of section 4.3, paragraph 3 to “The reacting node
>  SHOULD discard an OC-OLR AVP with a sequence number that is less than or
>  equal to the previously received sequence number.”
>