IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11

Eric McMurry <emcmurry@computer.org> Tue, 10 September 2013 03:24 UTC

Return-Path: <emcmurry@computer.org>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D7111E80EA; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 20:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.371
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.371 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gEqmmB8fCPb3; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 20:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292C221F9FF3; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 20:24:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r8A3OGtV032250 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:24:17 GMT
Received: from userz7021.oracle.com (userz7021.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8A3OFL7018523 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:24:15 GMT
Received: from abhmt108.oracle.com (abhmt108.oracle.com [141.146.116.60]) by userz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8A3OEPp018519; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:24:14 GMT
Received: from ericlaptop.casamcmurry.com (/76.184.161.215) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 20:24:14 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Eric McMurry <emcmurry@computer.org>
In-Reply-To: <8D9934B4-948F-47A5-AB5E-02DEDD5277F0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 22:24:13 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <271A8F02-3A74-46E9-B08E-2D155EC3DDD3@computer.org>
References: <CE53ED6D.1CBD%carl@redhoundsoftware.com> <8D9934B4-948F-47A5-AB5E-02DEDD5277F0@gmail.com>
To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]
Cc: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, secdir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs.all@tools.ietf.org, "lionel.morand@orange.com Morand" <lionel.morand@orange.com>, iesg@ietf.org, "bclaise@cisco.com Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-dime-overload-reqs-11
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:24:27 -0000

that matches what I came away with.  How would you like us to address that?


On Sep 9, 2013, at 22:22 , Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Folks,
> 
> So if I got it right, the last sentence of the Req13 will be removed and
> the Req31 stays as it is now.
> 
> This would be fine with me.
> 
> - JOuni
> 
> On Sep 10, 2013, at 4:27 AM, Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The intent was that the overload condition has granularity. That is, the
>>> overloaded node indicates an overload condition with some granularity,
>>> and later ends it. The act of ending doesn't change the granularity. We
>>> don't have an explicit requirement to be able to change the granularity
>>> of an existing condition. (Although we do not prevent a solution from
>>> offering that ability--but I suspect if the solution did that, it would
>>> involve multiple concurrent overload conditions, or ending one condition
>>> and starting another.)
>> 
>> Got it.  Thanks.  
>> 
>> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email