IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire

"Nirav Salot (nsalot)" <nsalot@cisco.com> Tue, 11 February 2014 10:23 UTC

Return-Path: <nsalot@cisco.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 E73D81A0943 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 02:23:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.049
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.049 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 qKgmLsxwXtxv for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 02:23:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DE9F1A0954 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 02:23:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1777; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1392114180; x=1393323780; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=25xesU7rsMbk0ISKTUSYk29i2riLlWLhZ9iHqXCAcSA=; b=KMZIz6V3s9umXgCyjKTd7aZCEwqdu7mdrB+q7cLsgXqTrOPvrO3hEcm7 W/ZREzix5rsA/wTWH4CapxeIyiS9J5KEwoeLSBuVsYgvXJAwZJft40nvX oc8IQi/cLxw7oSrIIh95pRX6b2dPc+jXw2xRlXH8j5qKhPZkyLZ1Bolxv w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgsFAB/5+VKtJXG//2dsb2JhbABZgww4V75lgQ0WdIIlAQEBAwEBAQE3NAsMBAIBCBEEAQELFAkHIQYLFAkIAgQBDQUIh2kDCQgNwF4Nh2UTBIxfgWkxBwaDHoEUAQOWPo5JhUOBb4E+gio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,825,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="303236432"
Received: from rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com ([173.37.113.191]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Feb 2014 10:22:59 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com [173.37.183.76]) by rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s1BAMxxg006609 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 10:22:59 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.55]) by xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([173.37.183.76]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 04:22:59 -0600
From: "Nirav Salot (nsalot)" <nsalot@cisco.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire
Thread-Index: AQHPJlGIdoxp4ZPGNkCdpdO55KBqgpqvEP0AgADIhpA=
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 10:22:58 +0000
Message-ID: <A9CA33BB78081F478946E4F34BF9AAA014D6979E@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
References: <057.8b248d3cb5db23879c2730b80d4657d7@trac.tools.ietf.org> <B08CCDA3-4E2B-444A-AE27-9DE2D9C0B458@gmail.com> <4B803326-40A9-4E98-AC12-7DDF46BD101B@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B803326-40A9-4E98-AC12-7DDF46BD101B@nostrum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.142.140.48]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>, "draft-docdt-dime-ovli@tools.ietf.org" <draft-docdt-dime-ovli@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire
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: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 10:23:19 -0000

Ben,

I resonate with your thinking below.

Regards,
Nirav.

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 9:54 PM
To: Jouni Korhonen
Cc: dime@ietf.org list; draft-docdt-dime-ovli@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #46: Bad normative advice on not letting overload reports expire


On Feb 10, 2014, at 5:16 AM, Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> My reasoning for explicit termination was that knowing the 
> implementation folks they will let overload conditions expire unless advised otherwise.
> And having unnecessary stuff hanging around waiting for a cleanup is 
> not a good thing in general. But I am open here for other options..
> 

I think it's reasonable to say that a reporting node should terminate an overload condition in a timely manner. But if it's about to expire anyway, then expiration might be just as timely as an explicit report. 

And of course, the definition of "timely" is somewhat a matter of policy. For example, I can imagine an deployment that had a large number of clients using fairly short validity durations, and _never_ explicitly signaling an end to an overload condition. This adds a bit of a "slow-start" to the recovery, since different clients will expire the overload condition at different times, and the load will ramp up gradually. I don't see anything wrong with that. Of course, it wouldn't work if one chose long validity durations, or if the signaling of overload to different clients happened in close synchronization.

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email