IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] [dime] #23: DOIC behavior for realm overload

"Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com> Tue, 04 February 2014 08:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.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 D51201A02A2 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 00:04:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
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 UxLMjWxYUtx4 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 00:04:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234211A018E for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 00:04:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id s1484nDh023190 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:04:49 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC004.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.35]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id s1484n0f019570 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:04:49 +0100
Received: from DEMUHTC008.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.39) by DEMUHTC004.nsn-intra.net (10.159.42.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.123.3; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:04:48 +0100
Received: from DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net ([169.254.14.242]) by DEMUHTC008.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.42.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:04:48 +0100
From: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <ulrich.wiehe@nsn.com>
To: "dime@ietf.org" <dime@ietf.org>, "srdonovan@usdonovans.com" <srdonovan@usdonovans.com>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] [dime] #23: DOIC behavior for realm overload
Thread-Index: AQHPFrzwmz+sjQyANE6AjPwpA+4fnZqk0H3A
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 08:04:47 +0000
Message-ID: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D9000668151B1CF5@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net>
References: <066.bc8b33b812f849d70cc96ca6c7f6d77d@trac.tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <066.bc8b33b812f849d70cc96ca6c7f6d77d@trac.tools.ietf.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.159.42.122]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 1962
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1391501091-00001A6F-D68AA7BE/0-0/0-0
Subject: Re: [Dime] [dime] #23: DOIC behavior for realm overload
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: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 08:04:57 -0000

Steve,

could you please explain why you propose to align in this direction?
I would have thougth that realm type reports apply only to requests that contain that realm but do not contain a destination-host.

Ulrich

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext dime issue tracker
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:25 PM
To: draft-docdt-dime-ovli@tools.ietf.org; srdonovan@usdonovans.com
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: [Dime] [dime] #23: DOIC behavior for realm overload

#23: DOIC behavior for realm overload

 This applies to draft-ietf-dime-ovli-01, which does not show up in the
 Component drop down menu.

 The current assumption in the -01 draft is inconsistent in the definition
 of behavior of behavior by a reacting node when it receives a realm
 overload report.

 Section 4.6 says overload treatment should apply to all request bound for
 the overloaded realm.

 Section 5.5.2 is not clear and there have been interpretations that a
 realm overload report only applies to requests that contain the realm and
 do not contain a destination-host AVP.

 Section 5.5.2 should be updated to be consistent with section 4.6.

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |      Owner:  draft-docdt-dime-
  srdonovan@usdonovans.com           |  ovli@tools.ietf.org
     Type:  defect                   |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                    |  Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  draft-docdt-dime-ovli    |    Version:  1.0
 Severity:  Active WG Document       |   Keywords:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/trac/ticket/23>
dime <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dime/>

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
DiME@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email