Subject: [Dime] Ulrich's suggested changes 22 and 23

From: Steve Donovan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 08:23:27 -0600

Ulrich,

For your changes 22 and 23:

Section 6.1, last paragraph:
Existing text:
    The OC-Feature-Vector sub-AVP is used to announce the DOIC features
    supported by the DOIC node, in the form of a flag-bits field in which
    each bit announces one feature or capability supported by the node
    (see Section 6.2).  The absence of the OC-Feature-Vector AVP
    indicates that only the default traffic abatement algorithm described
    in this specification is supported.
Comment: Absence of OC-Feature-Vector AVP indicates different things depending on the type of message (request / answer).
Proposal: Replace the paragraph with:
    The OC-Feature-Vector sub-AVP is used to announce the DOIC features
    supported by the DOIC node, in the form of a flag-bits field in which
    each bit announces one feature or capability supported by the node
    (see Section 6.2).  The absence of the OC-Feature-Vector AVP in request
    messages indicates that only the default traffic abatement algorithm
    described in this specification is supported. The absence of the OC-
    Feature-Vector AVP in answer messages indicates that the default
    traffic abatement algorithm described in this specification is selected
    (while other traffic abatement algorithms may be supported), and no
    features other than abatement algorithms are supported.

Section 6.2, 2nd paragraph:
Existing text:
    The OC-Feature-Vector sub-AVP is used to announce the DOIC features
    supported by the DOIC node, in the form of a flag-bits field in which
    each bit announces one feature or capability supported by the node
    (see Section 6.2).  The absence of the OC-Feature-Vector AVP
    indicates that only the default traffic abatement algorithm described
    in this specification is supported.
Comment: seems to be misplaced as reference is given to 6.2.
Proposal: remove the paragraph.

I support the wording change in #22 but suggest it be moved to section 
6.2, with the reference removed.  As a result, the paragraph should be 
removed from section 6.1 and changed in section 6.2 to the following 
(removing the reference):

    The OC-Feature-Vector sub-AVP is used to announce the DOIC features
    supported by the DOIC node, in the form of a flag-bits field in which
    each bit announces one feature or capability supported by the node.
    The absence of the OC-Feature-Vector AVP in request
    messages indicates that only the default traffic abatement algorithm
    described in this specification is supported. The absence of the OC-
    Feature-Vector AVP in answer messages indicates that the default
    traffic abatement algorithm described in this specification is selected
    (while other traffic abatement algorithms may be supported), and no
    features other than abatement algorithms are supported.

Regards,

Steve

---

From: "Wiehe, Ulrich (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 17:38:19 +0000

Steve,

I agree.

Regards
Ulrich

From: DiME [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of ext Steve Donovan
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 3:23 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Dime] Ulrich's suggested changes 22 and 23

Ulrich,

I support the wording change in #22 but suggest it be moved to section 6.2, with the reference removed.  As a result, the paragraph should be removed from section 6.1 and changed in section 6.2 to the following (removing the reference):

Steve