IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] Issue#29 proposed conclusion

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 20 February 2014 22:31 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.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 5E7CA1A0328 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:31:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no
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 jqX9015voj9w for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:31:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D141A032E for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:31:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.1.29] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s1KMVK4V007833 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 16:31:22 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3B73@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 16:31:21 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <32C8E469-48AE-4336-AF92-F6EB2B12EDA4@nostrum.com>
References: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B3B73@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net>
To: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.172.146.58 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/lEdRN8vU1XzptU1mVXriNSXsS2o
Cc: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] Issue#29 proposed conclusion
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: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:31:30 -0000

I concur with removing the sequence number from OC-Supported-Features.

On Feb 19, 2014, at 2:44 AM, Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich) <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com> wrote:

> #29: OC-Sequence-Number in OC-Supported-Features
>  
> Dear all,
>  
> I have received comments from Lionel, Jouni and Steve;
> I understand that Lionel and myself support removal of OC-Sequence-Number AVP from OC-Supported-Features AVP while Jouni has no strong view.  I’m not sure whether Steve is convinced by the response given to his comments.
>  
> In summary I dare to propose that we conclude in favour of removing OC-Sequence-Number from OC-Supported-Features.
>  
> Ulrich
>  
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email