Re: [Dime] New Version Notification for draft-korhonen-dime-ovl-00.txt

jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Sat, 03 November 2012 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAE7D21F9C68 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dplDlYxgCZb7 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-f44.google.com (mail-yh0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4398021F9C34 for <dime@ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f44.google.com with SMTP id 56so808022yhq.31 for <dime@ietf.org>; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 11:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=JbI+uQ1Wr70ABiazMvnXgK1tq3kISP+KZhGpBUgY13o=; b=A6lcPU1huwJMrgnCDLylv9v+jUG4iR4Nv5dIB+9w+zrNLbbGCzuVK6cnaTbePJ0xe8 uuSs0ndoRolhTD9nPfkwKBceRiDHKJEzW77XLMe3eW7LjCnx3kqhvYFIq4hG/cbAcVHv htsBrR/K0wQDxRn+SNsrD4LKm9akT70dn+wEr2iC1rHZpXPDPXGEZynkAI6GhfxvBWH+ L9HV9BcqgOiu3qo2kV9avNp6s6tY0rWB7XJKjTxTmTaldo/XVq+EyY2Xu7aT9PypOy/y m/R7dWgx8DbMYEjB3WN3Lq0aAcSnnV8GDRZOlagIL4hYi3dBvbONT8BJD12+HjR2ORQD ohxQ==
Received: by 10.236.82.178 with SMTP id o38mr5053478yhe.70.1351968295808; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 11:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.187.88.155] ([38.101.231.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z6sm12954494yhl.8.2012.11.03.11.44.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 03 Nov 2012 11:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201211031732.25598.isj@i1.dk>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 20:44:53 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E1810236-1E65-4335-B09A-BAA7CC255B0D@gmail.com>
References: <201211031732.25598.isj@i1.dk>
To: Ivan Skytte Jørgensen <isj@i1.dk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] New Version Notification for draft-korhonen-dime-ovl-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 18:44:57 -0000

Hi,

Thanks for the review. See my comments inline.

On Nov 3, 2012, at 6:32 PM, Ivan Skytte Jørgensen wrote:

>> 4.5. OC-Algorithm AVP
>>  Drop (0x00000001)
>> 
>>     Messages are plain dropped.  It is RECOMMENDED to drop messages
>>     selectively based, for example, on application priorities.  This
>>     is the default algorithm.
> 
> By "drop" don't you mean "not send" ?

Correct.

>> 4.9. OC-Sending-Rate AVP
>> 
>>  The OC-Sending-Rate (AVP Code TBD11) is of type Float32 and tells the
>>  the maximum Diameter message sending rate per second the sender of
>>  this information wishes to receive Diameter messages.  Only positive
>>  values are valid.  A value of zero (0.0) of the absence of this AVP
>>  means the information sender has no specific rate preference.
> 
> The special treatment of the value 0.0 sounds a bit ugly. Are there any diamter stacks that would have difficulties in simply not including the AVP?

Good point. THat could easily be defined as a default behavior
when the AVP is absent.

>>  If a DOCA server finds the sending rate value proposed by a DOCA
>>  client too big (i.e. too frequent periodic messages), then the DOCA
>>  server MUST send the DOCA-Report-Answer indicating an error and set
>>  the Result-Code to the DIAMETER_RATE_TOO_BIG value.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better if the DOCA client send a proposed rate, and the server responded with an accepted rate ?

Could be. I'll think about it.

- JOuni