[Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping mid=122
"Jon Shallow" <supjps-ietf@jpshallow.com> Sat, 04 August 2018 11:58 UTC
Return-Path: <supjps-ietf@jpshallow.com>
X-Original-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46361130E0C for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Aug 2018 04:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 cKJnunYfu-Lw for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Aug 2018 04:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.jpshallow.com (mail.jpshallow.com [217.40.240.153]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E6F912F1A5 for <dots@ietf.org>; Sat, 4 Aug 2018 04:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=N01332) by mail.jpshallow.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <jon.shallow@jpshallow.com>) id 1flvC7-000758-Dy for ietf-supjps-dots@ietf.org; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:58:03 +0100
From: Jon Shallow <supjps-ietf@jpshallow.com>
To: dots@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:58:04 +0100
Message-ID: <05de01d42bea$66b4bed0$341e3c70$@jpshallow.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05DF_01D42BF2.C879C310"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdQr6majIfwWOMkbRY6FrlC5ZlsRJA==
Content-Language: en-gb
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/lbmDpqO0uTYMuA_j_KqH_xv5xs4>
Subject: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping mid=122
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 11:58:06 -0000
Hi there, What happens when we receive mid=123, followed by mid=122 that overlaps mid=123? Do we put mid=122 into an active-but-terminating state? - state 5 is not really correct here as per the description Do we return 4.09 conflict with an appropriate (perhaps new) conflict-status? - my preference, but this is not said anywhere I can find - should conflict-scope also include the 'mid' in the list (YANG)? Do we return 4.00 (bad request)? - I do not really like this one as there is no indication as to why - especially of there was an out of sequence packet arrival at the DOTS server. Regards Jon
- [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping mid=… Jon Shallow
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … Jon Shallow
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … Jon Shallow
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC Signal: mid=123 then overlapping … mohamed.boucadair