[sip-overload] Comment on draft-ietf-soc-overload-control-02
Michael Procter <michael@voip.co.uk> Tue, 29 March 2011 14:01 UTC
Return-Path: <michael@voip.co.uk>
X-Original-To: sip-overload@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-overload@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB0E3A690F for <sip-overload@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FF-2xhBqxznz for <sip-overload@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys009aog103.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog103.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A51D33A693E for <sip-overload@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:01:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([209.85.212.52]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob103.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTZHmrSS8y7ZdQ6Qkz5P+nnrAYdzcbOiz@postini.com; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:03:26 PDT
Received: by mail-vw0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 16so200914vws.11 for <sip-overload@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:03:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.0.37 with SMTP id 5mr807493vdb.269.1301407405250; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:03:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.160.102 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:03:25 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:03:25 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTim54ZLRnwprSQW+t-4S3ZJNU+J_k-DdoQoQu2oP@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Procter <michael@voip.co.uk>
To: sip-overload@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: [sip-overload] Comment on draft-ietf-soc-overload-control-02
X-BeenThere: sip-overload@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Overload <sip-overload.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-overload>, <mailto:sip-overload-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-overload>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-overload@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-overload-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-overload>, <mailto:sip-overload-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:01:48 -0000
I'm assuming this is a typo/simple omission, but I may be wrong. Section 7 contains: A SIP client maintains the "oc" parameter values received along with the address and port number of the SIP servers from which they were received... Section 8 contains: After selecting a specific SIP server from the Expected Output, the SIP client MUST determine if it already has overload control parameter values for the server chosen from the Expected Output. I was expecting Section 8 to say "for the server and port chosen", not just the server. Is the omission of the port in this check intentional? Or am I conflating 'server' and 'address' incorrectly? Regards, Michael
- [sip-overload] Comment on draft-ietf-soc-overload… Michael Procter