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