Re: [Dime] Clashing AVP codes
<lionel.morand@orange-ftgroup.com> Fri, 10 June 2011 09:52 UTC
Return-Path: <lionel.morand@orange-ftgroup.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2C511E80E4 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QOEOMlHIl53h for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:52:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [217.108.152.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A27A11E80A2 for <dime@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:52:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id BC63C7B8003; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:54:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE04D7B8001; Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:54:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ftrdmel1.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.40]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:52:46 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CC2754.26873E64"
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:52:45 +0200
Message-ID: <B11765B89737A7498AF63EA84EC9F5779FF213@ftrdmel1>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikq=i8ORZvWDtd3GNVfeCn5Xv1bUg@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Dime] Clashing AVP codes
thread-index: AcwnTyyoZJso3pTnTYOkyEV70CubzQAAwetw
References: <BANLkTikq=i8ORZvWDtd3GNVfeCn5Xv1bUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: lionel.morand@orange-ftgroup.com
To: naveen.sarma@gmail.com, dime@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jun 2011 09:52:46.0839 (UTC) FILETIME=[26C9B070:01CC2754]
Subject: Re: [Dime] Clashing AVP codes
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 10 Jun 2011 09:52:49 -0000
Hi Naveen, Both codes are correct! J "Filter-Id" (Code 11) is an IETF standard AVP whereas "3GPP-Session-Stop-Indicator" is a vendor-specific AVP defined by 3GPP i.e. (defined with the code 11 under the Vendor-id= 10415). The "V" bit is set and the vendor-id field is present in the header of vendor-specific AVP (that allows to distinguish them from standard AVP). The Standard code value range is distinct from the vendor-specific code value range. So, you don't have to consider only the code value but also in which range the AVP is defined. Best Regards, Lionel De : dime-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Naveen Kottapalli Envoyé : vendredi 10 juin 2011 11:16 À : dime@ietf.org Objet : [Dime] Clashing AVP codes Hey! There are two AVPs (Filter-Id, 3GPP-Session-Stop-Indicator) defined in 3GPP specification 32.299 with same value 11. Can anyone tell which one of them is the correct one? Yours, Naveen.
- [Dime] Clashing AVP codes Naveen Kottapalli
- Re: [Dime] Clashing AVP codes lionel.morand