Re: [Dime] [dime] #32: Sequence-Number Time-Stamp values within OC-OLR

["Nirav Salot (nsalot)" <[e-mail]>]

I also agree.

Regards,
Nirav.

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 11:50 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #32: Sequence-Number Time-Stamp values within OC-OLR

The existing wording seems actually fuzzy.
If it is "like an NTP timestamp", be proud and say it loud!

In summary: ok with the proposal if it clarifies this handling of this sequence-number.

Lionel

-----Message d'origine-----
De : dime issue tracker [mailto:[e-mail]]
Envoyé : mardi 4 février 2014 09:50
À : MORAND Lionel IMT/OLN
Cc : [e-mail]
Objet : [dime] #32: Sequence-Number Time-Stamp values within OC-OLR

#32: Sequence-Number Time-Stamp values within OC-OLR

 The -01 draft says in clause 4.4:
    From the functionality point of view, the OC-Sequence-Number AVP MUST
    be used as a non-volatile increasing counter between two overload
    control endpoints (neglecting the fact that the contents of the AVP
    is a 64-bit NTP timestamp [RFC5905]).  The sequence number is only
    required to be unique between two overload control endpoints.
    Sequence numbers are treated in uni-directional manner, i.e. two
    sequence numbers on each direction between two endpoints are not
    related or correlated.

    When generating sequence numbers, the new sequence number MUST be
    greater than any sequence number previously seen between two
    endpoints within a time window that tolerates the wraparound of the
    NTP timestamp (i.e. approximately 68 years).


 With this mechanism it is difficult to get back to sync once you are out  of sync (for whatever reason).
 It is proposed to mandate that the Sequence Number is a real 64-bit NTP  timestamp (RFC5905) indicating the point in time when the OLR was created,  and to mandate that  OLRs with a time stamp higher than time of reception  must be ignored by the reacting node.

-- 
--------------------------------------+--------------------------
 Reporter:  [e-mail]  |      Owner:  Ulrich Wiehe
     Type:  defect                    |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                     |  Milestone:
Component:  draft-docdt-dime-ovli     |    Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document        |   Keywords:
--------------------------------------+--------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/trac/ticket/32>
dime <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/>


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime