Subject: [Dime] inconsistency in draft-ietf-dime-ovli-05.txt

From: Dave Dolson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:47:20 +0000

Reading the recent revision,
https://github.com/jounikor/draft-docdt-dime-ovli/blob/master/draft-ietf-dime-ovli-05.txt

Note that 86400ms is only about 86s, not 24h. (I suspect the 86400 number lingers from when this duration was defined in seconds?)

Having noted that, I think 86s is a much more reasonable upper limit than 24h.
Let's say a node is told to reduce by 100%, with a timeout of 24h, and the system goes idle. A team of support engineers goes into investigation mode, cannot find the problem, and 24h later the problem mysteriously fixes itself... unless the box is rebooted first.

6.5. OC-Validity-Duration AVP

The OC-Validity-Duration AVP (AVP code TBD4) is of type Unsigned32

and indicates in milliseconds the validity time of the overload

report. The number of milliseconds is measured after reception of

the first OC-OLR AVP with a given value of OC-Sequence-Number AVP.

The default value for the OC-Validity-Duration AVP is 5000 (i.e.; 5

seconds). When the OC-Validity-Duration AVP is not present in the

OC-OLR AVP, the default value applies. Validity duration with values

above 86400 (i.e.; 24 hours) MUST NOT be used. Invalid duration

values are treated as if the OC-Validity-Duration AVP were not

present and result in the default value being used.

David Dolson
Senior Software Architect
Sandvine