[Dime] open issues #1 in DOIC

Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Fri, 29 November 2013 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02F01AE28F for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:30:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eVJqz0BNAX8m for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:30:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bk0-x231.google.com (mail-bk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4D61AE28C for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:30:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-bk0-f49.google.com with SMTP id my13so4139110bkb.36 for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:30:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date :to:mime-version; bh=ZVwpOeT5k77W8s4NacTv/mQAlf7/LCsIOc+tgwV3PBc=; b=cudsWY3MZLvaRBpGZCY9UxJwBHOtUSxH1ZwQ6xwnGptkA07/HWxTQfX0o6baYiRjmX dXvwPDFWDMmkBDqVveIS7FUGbM6o/gw/nYjZEXC+Bm2poUGr9hVAQ2sZAhd15pv8UUSM GeL9lAqpG9QUJVdP/UQiWH5l2NbrYq7iMxLyEDI+zxKH/oX2U0+KUj4Utto8s7TpyUQG vCHeIZ4rds6GABcDNPfNEgX+50y/INs2xMQfDAfAtv+nXugA6ZlVx7XV4KOEeZDPISgE hcCPXLzNti9Dytu8VGE9jj3PohtjSEambSUMBN7xb9DWe45sl2lxNYV7QQ69Y7cVwXnq Ti4g==
X-Received: by with SMTP id jb6mr333384bkb.69.1385713803557; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:30:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:1bc8:101:f101:a031:8d25:ae76:95d8? ([2001:1bc8:101:f101:a031:8d25:ae76:95d8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id pu8sm62589001bkb.9.2013. for <dime@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:30:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5E28C8B7-2E5E-41E8-9592-24A19AD76826@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:30:04 +0200
To: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Subject: [Dime] open issues #1 in DOIC
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: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:30:06 -0000


           [OpenIssue: Do we assume that all requests in a pseudo-session
           typically need to go to the same server?]

The example here is in context of Cx. Not that I am expert on Cx (or anything)
but based on the CCF the requests _may_ have destination-host. Thus, I assume
that it is an implementation issue whether pseudo-sessions need to go to the
same server.. I guess we cannot have such firm requirement. Correct?

- Jouni