Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5084)
"Priyatosh Mandal" <priyatos@cdot.in> Mon, 14 August 2017 11:19 UTC
Return-Path: <priyatos@cdot.in>
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 9031813219E for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 04:19:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=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 bHlaIUwF2vHb for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 04:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandesh.cdotd.ernet.in (unknown [196.1.105.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9872C1320D8 for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 04:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.cdot.in (webmail.cdotd.ernet.in [196.1.105.198]) by sandesh.cdotd.ernet.in (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EEB11DDE4A8; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 16:48:36 +0530 (IST)
Received: from cdot.in (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cdot.in (8.14.7/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v7EBIY0m022914; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 16:48:34 +0530
From: Priyatosh Mandal <priyatos@cdot.in>
To: Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "vf0213@gmail.com" <vf0213@gmail.com>, "jari.arkko@ericsson.com" <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>, "john.loughney@nokia.com" <john.loughney@nokia.com>, "glenzorn@gmail.com" <glenzorn@gmail.com>, "bclaise@cisco.com" <bclaise@cisco.com>, "warren@kumari.net" <warren@kumari.net>, "jouni.nospam@gmail.com" <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>, "lionel.morand@orange.com" <lionel.morand@orange.com>
Cc: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 16:48:34 +0530
Message-Id: <20170814110558.M60858@cdot.in>
In-Reply-To: <20170814105124.5115986.90299.28199@sandvine.com>
References: <20170811040456.E8570B81789@rfc-editor.org>, <20170814041602.M44812@cdot.in> <20170814105124.5115986.90299.28199@sandvine.com>
X-Mailer: OpenWebMail 2.54
X-OriginatingIP: 196.1.110.232 (priyatos)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=OPENWEBMAIL_ATT_0.0881798638469888"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/n_JC7nYa0p84I9WI_HgOv6kosGk>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 05:54:38 -0700
Subject: Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5084)
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 11:19:41 -0000
Hello Sir, The situation is a transition from the maximum value 4294967295 of Origin-State-Id. If after this, the value of Origin-State-Id is increased, it will automatically become 0. So the peer node which receives the value 0 after 4294967295, can assume the node which sent this 0, faced a restart. Here the peer-node is already aware that the previous value of origin-state-id was 4294967295. So it can easily conclude node restart. I understand the meaning of 0 as explained in RFC 6733 :"If an access device does not intend for such inferences to be made, it MUSTeither not include Origin-State-Id in any message or set its value to 0". But this is a special case, where the value of Origin-State-Id changes from 4294967295 to 0. So kindly reconsider this. Thanking you, Priyatosh On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 10:51:25 +0000, Dave Dolson wrote In my opinion, the change should not be accepted. In your roll-over special case, the device should skip over the value 0, using 1 or some other value instead of zero. David Dolson Sandvine From: Priyatosh Mandal Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 12:57 AM To: RFC Errata System; vf0213@gmail.com; jari.arkko@ericsson.com; john.loughney@nokia.com; glenzorn@gmail.com; bclaise@cisco.com; warren@kumari.net; jouni.nospam@gmail.com; lionel.morand@orange.com Cc: dime@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5084) Dear All, Kindly verify this. Regards, Priyatosh Mandal On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:04:56 -0700 (PDT), RFC Errata System wrote The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6733, "Diameter Base Protocol". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5084 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Priyatosh Mandal <priyatos@cdot.in> Section: 8.16 Original Text ------------- By including Origin-State-Id in a message, it allows other Diameter entities to infer that sessions associated with a lower Origin-State-Id are no longer active. If an access device does not intend for such inferences to be made, it MUST either not include Origin-State-Id in any message or set its value to 0. Corrected Text -------------- By including Origin-State-Id in a message, it allows other Diameter entities to infer that sessions associated with a lower Origin-State-Id are no longer active. If an access device does not intend for such inferences to be made, it MUST either not include Origin-State-Id in any message or set its value to 0. As a special case when the value of Origin-State-Id changes from 4294967295 to 0, then also the access device clear all the sessions. Notes ----- Origin-State-Id is defined as Unsigned32 in RFC 6733, Section 8.16. So the maximum value it can have is 4294967295. If the system restarts many times and the value of Origin-State-Id reaches the value which is same as its maximum value 4294967295. Then what will happen for the next restart. At the next restart the value of Origin-State-Id will be 0 if we try to increase the value of Origin-State-Id. It is not defined in the RFC 6733, that how the system should behave after 4294967295-th restart with respect to Origin-State-Id. Generally when the peer receives an increased value of Origin-State-Id, then it clear all sessions. If the value of Origin-State-Id reaches its maximum i.e., 4294967295, then after another restart its value will be 0. For a special case for transition of value of Origin-State-Id from 4294967295 to 0, the peer should clear its session. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC6733 (draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-33) -------------------------------------- Title : Diameter Base Protocol Publication Date : October 2012 Author(s) : V. Fajardo, Ed., J. Arkko, J. Loughney, G. Zorn, Ed. Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Diameter Maintenance and Extensions Area : Operations and Management Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG Priyatosh Ext: 8517 Mob: 9810480266 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ::Disclaimer:: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The contents of this email and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. It shall not attach any liability on C-DOT. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions Priyatosh Ext: 8517 Mob: 9810480266 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ::Disclaimer:: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The contents of this email and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. It shall not attach any liability on C-DOT. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions
- [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5084) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Priyatosh Mandal
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Yuval Lifshitz
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Priyatosh Mandal
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Priyatosh Mandal
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Priyatosh Mandal
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6733 (5… Priyatosh Mandal