IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] [dime] #34: Semantics of OC-Report-Type AVP

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Fri, 14 February 2014 22:21 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 2FBA31A01E0 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 14:21:54 -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 CnJln7hDbVji for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 14:21:53 -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 A16D11A0252 for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Feb 2014 14:21:52 -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 s1EMLYmd054863 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:21:44 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <52FCBBF7.7000700@usdonovans.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:21:27 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D4BE67F7-6D7B-4DB2-8DF0-D430A8FC6582@nostrum.com>
References: <066.b54c2f5aeb31c9b3f88c96008120290d@trac.tools.ietf.org> <32578_1392038726_52F8D345_32578_229_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E4974D3@PEXCVZYM13.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <E194C2E18676714DACA9C3A2516265D202663C4A@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B9209772EF4@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <19874_1392116210_52FA01F2_19874_3990_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E499C4E@PEXCVZYM13.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <087A34937E64E74E848732CFF8354B9209773085@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <52FA3CC6.905020 5@usdonovans.com> <17910_1392132298_52FA40CA_17910_2863_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E49A28D@PEXCVZYM13.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <11546_1392132645_52FA4225_11546_3173_1_0aa80fb0-8382-459e-aebf-2ee5d5f70edc@PEXCVZYH02.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <E194C2E18676714DACA9C3A2516265D2026644D6@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <D2D4DD91-8F3D-4C24-9E3A-E2AE3918D468@gmail.com> <52FCBBF7.7000700@usdonovans.com>
To: Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.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/qEd4YAv1Xm9RkYMGs5OPPtAqGWw
Cc: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #34: Semantics of OC-Report-Type AVP
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, 14 Feb 2014 22:21:54 -0000

(Apologies for coming late to this thread)

On Feb 13, 2014, at 6:35 AM, Steve Donovan <srdonovan@usdonovans.com> wrote:

> Ok, Ok, no reason to gang up on me. :-)
> What we have here is an overload report to reduce realm routed requests.  I think we should be explicit in the draft to define it as such.
> 

At the risk of joining the anti-Steve gang, I feel the need to belatedly mention that my personal intent way back when we talked about the mixed-state problem was that realm reports applied to realm-routed requests. 

> I am still concerned that we do not have a way to indicate overload of the realm as a whole.  I'll enter a new trouble ticket to capture this issue.
> 

I do not object to adding that ability. Would it be a new OLR type? If so, would it need to go in the base draft or could it be an extension?

> Steve

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email