Re: [sip-overload] draft-ietf-soc-overload-control-02

["Vijay K. Gurbani" <[e-mail]>]

On 03/29/2011 08:58 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> OK so you asked me to look at section 12 in the soc meeting and I
> have done so.
[...]
> My understanding for allowing this is simplicity in the sender (to
> treat all 100 and 1xx in a similar manner at the sender), rather than
> expectation that the receiver will receive it. I think this point
> needs to be made clearer.

Keith: Well ... Section 12 considers simplicity in the receiver
as well as the sender.  The sender of the response does not need to
couple TU-provided information (oc) with the response being
generated at the transaction layer (100), and on the
receiving side, the receiver does not have to provide the
oc information from the 100 to the TU.

If this is not clear, I will make another stab at this.
I have to update Section 12 to incorporate Victor's comment
regarding 100rel anyway.  So, stay tuned for the next revision.

Thanks,

- vijay
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [e-mail]
Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/