Subject: [Dots] New DOTS signal and data channel requirements

From: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 12:21:35 +0000

Starting a new thread to discuss the below new requirement from Jon:

[Jon] I have re-read the requirements / architecture drafts.  I agree that currently the White/Black/Filter definitions have no dependency on the mitigation request – it is up to the DOTS server (GW or not) as to how the White/Black/Filter definitions get passed on to DOTS mitigator (out of spec), but the DOTS server needs to know which of the White/Black/Filter definitions are relevant when a mitigation request comes in.  Currently, it is possible for the DOTS Server to hold White/Black/Filter definitions on a per client identity.  When the White/Black/Filter definitions are passed from a GW Client side to a GW server side and on to the next DOTS server, GW server side has to convey also something about the clients on the GW client side for the DOTS server to maintain the White/Black/Filter definitions on a per pseudo “client identity” – so when the migration request is passed to the DOS server via a GW it knows what White/Black/Filter definitions to apply to that mitigation request.

-Tiru