Hi Steve, Thanks, I have no more comments Roni > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Donovan > Sent: יום ג 07 מרץ 2017 17:45 > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Review of draft-ietf-dime-load-07 > > Roni, > > Thank you for your review. Please see my comments inline. > > Steve > > On 2/23/17 3:01 AM, Roni Even wrote: > > Reviewer: Roni Even > > Review result: Ready with Nits > > > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by > > the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like > > any other last call comments. > > > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > > > Document: draft-ietf-dime-load-07 > > Reviewer: Roni Even > > Review Date: 2017-02-23 > > IETF LC End Date: 2017-02-27 > > IESG Telechat date: 2017-03-16 > > > > Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard > > track RFC > > > > Major issues: > > > > Minor issues: > > > > I understand that each node can calculate the load differently , the > > example in figure 8 demonstrate that the agent selection may be > > different if the agent aggregates load from the servers to calculate > > its load or just conveys his load, possibly even that each one of the > > agents will use different method. Why not mandate load calculation > > using aggregated weighted loads? > SRD> The working group thought it was best to leave this as an > implementation decision. > > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > 1. In section 5 paragraph 9 "The load report includes a value > > indicating the load of the sending > > node relative load of the sending node, " should be just "The load > > report includes a value indicating the relative load of the sending > > node," > SRD> Yes, change made. > > 2. In section 6.2 "weigth " > SRD> Change made. > > 3. in the security consideration what about an endpoint in the middle > > changing the host load value causing a change in the routing > > decisions. > SRD> I'm assuming that you mean an agent in the middle changing the host > value. I've added the following to the security considerations section > -- "Given that routing decisions are impacted by load information, there is > potential for negative impacts on a Diameter network caused by erroneous > or malicious load reports. This includes the malicious changing of load values > by Diameter Agents." > > > > > > > >