[Dime] Diameter Group: Type?

Erez Nassimi <erez.nassimi@amdocs.com> Mon, 24 January 2011 13:48 UTC

Return-Path: <erez.nassimi@amdocs.com>
X-Original-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D0593A63D3 for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 05:48:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pFtqQmiaWU-3 for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 05:48:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from isomail1.amdocs.com (isomail1.amdocs.com [193.43.244.88]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BBB3A6AC4 for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 05:48:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by isomail1.amdocs.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EC99F7039A; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:51:37 +0200 (IST)
Received: from ilhodmailfe2.corp.amdocs.com (unknown [10.236.20.101]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by isomail1.amdocs.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63E8D7011D for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:51:29 +0200 (IST)
Received: from ILHODMAIL1.corp.amdocs.com ([10.236.20.104]) by ilhodmailfe2.corp.amdocs.com ([10.236.20.101]) with mapi; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:51:29 +0200
From: Erez Nassimi <erez.nassimi@amdocs.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:51:27 +0200
Thread-Topic: Diameter Group: Type?
Thread-Index: Acu7zcw3QXkiybOzQuybqghTUo6vYg==
Message-ID: <3EB9A6A055A0A74D816B7BA703D4054101A889BD37@ILHODMAIL1.corp.amdocs.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3EB9A6A055A0A74D816B7BA703D4054101A889BD37ILHODMAIL1cor_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 08:06:50 -0800
Subject: [Dime] Diameter Group: Type?
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 13:50:09 -0000

To whom it may concern:
======================

Dealing with the Diameter standard for more than 2 years, I always had the following question, I never dared to ask. But even after 2 years, I do not seem to have a good answer for it:

In RFC 3588, section 4.2 - AVP Data Formats, "Grouped" is defined as a "basic type". Doesn't it make more sense to set a flag for Grouped AVP in flags section? Group may be basic but it is not a real type. It's just an indication of a complex data structure.

If "Grouped" is defined as a flag, it will simplify any parser's work - and performance is such a rare resource.

Thanks in advance,
Erez Nassimi
erezna@amdocs.com<mailto:erezn@hotmail.com>
Desk : +972-9-77-86073
Cell : +972-54-7296230
Fax  : +972-9-77-61783

Did you know...?
With Amdocs' innovative new "Turbo Charging"<http://www.amdocs.com/Site/News/News+Articles/2008/Press+Releases/Turbo+Charging.htm> complex event processing technology, service providers can process thousands of charging events per CPU in real-time over low-cost hardware (like blade servers), all with the comprehensive functionality of Amdocs CES - Billing 7.5.


This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp