Subject: [Dime] More minor comments on the rfc3588bis draft

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:54:24 +0200

>
>    Example-Request ::= < Diameter Header: 9999999, REQ, PXY >
>                        { User-Name }
>                      * { Origin-Host }
>                      * [ AVP
Something seems to be missing from the end. Add "]".

>    The authorization server (chain) directs the selection of proper
Suggest rewriting "(chain)" as "(and the related chain of proxies)".

> T(Potentially re-transmitted message)

We had a lengthy discussion back at the time of the RFC3588
specification on the T flag. Based on real-world experience and
implementations, do we still believe we need this flag? I apologize if
this has already been discussed in Dime.

Jari

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