Subject: [Dime] #50: OC-OLR AVP implicit info - proposed conclusion

From: Maria Cruz Bartolome <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 16:16:50 +0000

Hello all,

My understanding is that the following conclusion is reached:

 Now (chapter 4.3):

    The OC-OLR AVP does not contain explicit information to which
    application it applies to and who inserted the AVP or whom the
    specific OC-OLR AVP concerns to. Both these information is
    implicitly learned from the encapsulating Diameter message/command.
    The application the OC-OLR AVP applies to is the same as the
    Application-Id found in the Diameter message header.  The identity
    the OC-OLR AVP concerns is determined from the Origin-Host AVP found
    from the encapsulating Diameter command.

Will be replaced by:

The OC-OLR AVP does not contain explicitly all information needed by 
the reacting node in order to decide whether a subsequent request must 
undergo a throttling process with the received reduction percentage.
The value of the OC-Report-Type AVP within the OC-OLR AVP indicates 
which implicit information is relevant for this decision (see clause 4.6).

This conclusion is based on proposed conclusion for #Issue 34

---

From: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 06:27:26 +0000

I agree
Ulrich

-----Original Message-----
From: DiME [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of ext Maria Cruz Bartolome
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 5:17 PM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [Dime] #50: OC-OLR AVP implicit info - proposed conclusion

Hello all,

 Now (chapter 4.3):

Will be replaced by:

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime