IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] Conclusion for Sequence Numbers - was Re: OVLI: comments to 4.3

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 10 December 2013 21:36 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 A28071AE06B for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:36:29 -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 h5Xf_0W959J4 for <dime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:36:28 -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 AFF351ADFF6 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:36:28 -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 rBALaHsQ001664 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:36:18 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <1CD20507-B0FE-4367-804A-B831734CF060@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:36:16 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AE7ADAA1-B8DB-4C5F-8444-46D82B0BC395@nostrum.com>
References: <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D90006681519DB1B@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <C66C8914-AA7A-47F5-8EA4-7B0ECEDA5368@gmail.com> <52A5E902.20605@usdonovans.com> <7475B713-1104-4791-96B1-CE97632A0D69@nostrum.com> <B81C3281-95F9-4F28-8662-2E20A6AE96A1@gmail.com> <5BCBA1FC2B7F0B4C9D935572D90006681519E476@DEMUMBX014.nsn-intra.net> <1CD20507-B0FE-4367-804A-B831734CF060@gmail.com>
To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.172.146.58 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dime] Conclusion for Sequence Numbers - was Re: OVLI: comments to 4.3
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, 10 Dec 2013 21:36:29 -0000

On Dec 10, 2013, at 3:31 PM, Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Jouni,
>> 
>> 1. I find the texts
>> a) "The sequence number ... does not need to be monotonically increasing"
>> and 
> 
> Means the delta from old-seqno to new-seqno can be any non-negative integer
> (within the given limits) not something fixed step/delta (like +1). As long as
> "new-seqno >= old-seqno" holds we are fine.

My understanding is that "new-seqno >= old-seqno" is the _definition_ of monotonically increasing.

But don't we want "new-seqno > old-seqno", that is, increase by a positive integer? (Assuming we are talking about a new OLR, not merely a copy of an old one.)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email