Re: [sip-overload] Local Policy Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-soc-load-control-event-package-05.txt

I'm not convinced we have got to the bottom of the requirement yet. Writing SHOULD is not an excuse for writing a poor requirement, yet that seems currently to be the excuse for wring SHOULD instead of MUST. Ideally I should still be able to still identify conformance or no conformance to a SHOULD requirement.

I suspect what we need to do is find a more specific requirement and then cover the rest of the problem in more informative text, rather than trying to address everything in a single requirement sentence.

I agree that if we end up writing a SHOULD, then there should be associated informative text that identifies the example circumstances for ignoring the SHOULD. That has long been an unwritten rule, and without it the SHOULD always gets interpreted as a MAY.

Regards

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-overload-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sip-overload-bounces@ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Charles Shen
> Sent: 14 January 2013 17:03
> To: Janet P Gunn
> Cc: sip-overload@ietf.org; Hilt, Volker (Volker)
> Subject: Re: [sip-overload] Local Policy Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-soc-
> load-control-event-package-05.txt
> 
> I am not in favor of opening up more cans of whatever at this stage :)
> 
> I think we just need to define and clarify the line. At least "the
> Overload
>  Algorithm(s) in effect at that node" sounds much better than "the
> Overload Algorithm(s)" alone. (Optionally) plus something like "the
> interactions of those Overload Algorithms are out of scope".
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Charles
> 
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Janet P Gunn <jgunn6@csc.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > My personal thought is that in each case, it would refer to the Overload
> > Algorithm(s) in effect at that node.
> >
> > But that brings up a whole can of worms about interaction between
> > algorithms..
> >
> > If the Event package has set up an a-priori Overload  Control, and then
> an
> > actual overload triggers a "feedback" Overload Control, how do they
> > interact?  The max? the min? the "product"
> >
> > Is that a can of worms we want to open at this point?
> >
> > Janet
> >
> > charles.newyork@gmail.com wrote on 01/14/2013 11:36:34 AM:
> >
> >> From: Charles Shen <charles@cs.columbia.edu>
> >> To: Volker Hilt <volker.hilt@alcatel-lucent.com>om>, Janet P Gunn/USA/
> >> CSC@CSC, "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@bell-labs.com>
> >> Cc: sip-overload@ietf.org
> >> Date: 01/14/2013 11:37 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [sip-overload] Local Policy Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-
> >> soc-load-control-event-package-05.txt
> >> Sent by: charles.newyork@gmail.com
> >>
> >> Hi Volker, Janet and Vijay,
> >>
> >> Since we are talking about putting the same texts in the
> >> overload-control and event-package draft, would it be better to
> >> clarify a bit about "the SIP Overload Algorithm" in this sentence?
> >>
> >> "It is expected a SIP client will follow local policy
> >> as long as the result is consistent with the SIP Overload Algorithm."
> >>
> >> Specifically, are we referring to mechanisms in both drafts (and in
> >> that case, should we add cross reference to them?) as well as any
> >> future Overload Algorithms?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Charles
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Volker Hilt
> >> <volker.hilt@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> >> > Vijay,
> >> >
> >> > the sentence Janet has proposed works for me. You can replace the
> >> > sentence I
> >> > had suggested after the first paragraph with Janets proposal.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> >
> >> > Volker
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 14.01.2013 17:15, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 01/14/2013 10:09 AM, Volker Hilt wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That works for me!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Volker: Can either you or Janet please propose the exact wordings
> >> >> to go into the modified text I proposed in [1]?  This will avoid
> >> >> any guesswork and expedite the process of getting the drafts out.
> >> >>
> >> >> [1]
> >> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-
> overload/current/msg00885.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >>
> >> >> - vijay
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > sip-overload mailing list
> >> > sip-overload@ietf.org
> >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-overload
> _______________________________________________
> sip-overload mailing list
> sip-overload@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-overload