draft-ietf-dime-agent-overload-03.txt   draft-ietf-dime-agent-overload-04.txt 
Diameter Maintenance and Extensions (DIME) S. Donovan Diameter Maintenance and Extensions (DIME) S. Donovan
Internet-Draft Oracle Internet-Draft Oracle
Intended status: Standards Track October 14, 2015 Intended status: Standards Track March 18, 2016
Expires: April 16, 2016 Expires: September 19, 2016
Diameter Agent Overload and the Peer Overload Report Diameter Agent Overload and the Peer Overload Report
draft-ietf-dime-agent-overload-03.txt draft-ietf-dime-agent-overload-04.txt
Abstract Abstract
This specification documents an extension to the Diameter Overload This specification documents an extension to the Diameter Overload
Indication Conveyance (DOIC) base solution. The extension defines Indication Conveyance (DOIC) [RFC7683] base solution. The extension
the Peer overload report type. The initial use case for the Peer defines the Peer overload report type. The initial use case for the
report is the handling of occurrences of overload of a Diameter Peer report is the handling of occurrences of overload of a Diameter
agent. agent.
Requirements Requirements
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 16, 2016. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 19, 2016.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Peer Report Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Peer Report Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Diameter Agent Overload Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Diameter Agent Overload Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.1. Single Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1.1. Single Agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1.2. Redundant Agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.2. Redundant Agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.3. Agent Chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.3. Agent Chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Diameter Endpoint Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Diameter Endpoint Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.1. Hop-by-hop Abatement Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.1. Hop-by-hop Abatement Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Interaction Between Host/Realm and Peer Overload Reports . . 8 4. Interaction Between Host/Realm and Peer Overload Reports . . 8
5. Peer Report Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Peer Report Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
skipping to change at page 2, line 38 skipping to change at page 2, line 38
5.2.1. Overload Control State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.2.1. Overload Control State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2.2. Reporting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS . . . . 11 5.2.2. Reporting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS . . . . 11
5.2.3. Reacting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS . . . . 11 5.2.3. Reacting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS . . . . 11
5.2.4. Peer Report Reporting Node Behavior . . . . . . . . . 13 5.2.4. Peer Report Reporting Node Behavior . . . . . . . . . 13
5.2.5. Peer Report Reacting Node Behavior . . . . . . . . . 13 5.2.5. Peer Report Reacting Node Behavior . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Peer Report AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6. Peer Report AVPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1. OC-Supported-Features AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.1. OC-Supported-Features AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1.1. OC-Feature-Vector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.1.1. OC-Feature-Vector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1.2. OC-Peer-Algo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.1.2. OC-Peer-Algo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.2. OC-OLR AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.2. OC-OLR AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.2.1. OC-Report-Type AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.2.1. OC-Report-Type AVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.3. OC-SourceID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.3. OC-SourceID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.4. Attribute Value Pair flag rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.4. Attribute Value Pair flag rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.1. AVP codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7.2. New registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document defines the behavior of Diameter nodes when Diameter This document defines the behavior of Diameter nodes when Diameter
agents enter an overload condition and send an overload report agents enter an overload condition and send an overload report
requesting a reduction of traffic. It also defines new overload requesting a reduction of traffic. It also defines new overload
report type, the Peer overload report type, that is used for handling report type, the Peer overload report type, that is used for handling
of agent overload conditions. The Peer overload report type is of agent overload conditions. The Peer overload report type is
defined in a generic fashion so that it can also be used for other defined in a generic fashion so that it can also be used for other
Diameter overload scenaios. Diameter overload scenaios.
The base Diameter overload specification [I-D.ietf-dime-ovli] The base Diameter overload specification [RFC7683] addresses the
addresses the handling of overload when a Diameter endpoint (a handling of overload when a Diameter endpoint (a Diameter Client or
Diameter Client or Diameter Server as defined in [RFC6733]) becomes Diameter Server as defined in [RFC6733]) becomes overloaded.
overloaded.
In the base specification, the goal is to handle abatement of the In the base specification, the goal is to handle abatement of the
overload occurrence as close to the source of the Diameter traffic as overload occurrence as close to the source of the Diameter traffic as
is feasible. When possible this is done at the originator of the is feasible. When possible this is done at the originator of the
traffic, generally referred to as a Diameter Client. A Diameter traffic, generally referred to as a Diameter Client. A Diameter
Agent might also handle the overload mitigation. For instance, a Agent might also handle the overload mitigation. For instance, a
Diameter Agent might handle Diameter overload mitigation when it Diameter Agent might handle Diameter overload mitigation when it
knows that a Diameter Client does not support the DOIC extension. knows that a Diameter Client does not support the DOIC extension.
This document extends the base Diameter endpoint overload This document extends the base Diameter endpoint overload
specification to address the case when Diameter Agents become specification to address the case when Diameter Agents become
overloaded. Just as is the case with other Diameter nodes -- overloaded. Just as is the case with other Diameter nodes --
Diameter Clients and Diameter Servers -- surges in Diameter traffic Diameter Clients and Diameter Servers -- surges in Diameter traffic
can cause a Diameter Agent to be asked to handle more Diameter can cause a Diameter Agent to be asked to handle more Diameter
traffic than it was configured to handle. For a more detailed traffic than it was configured to handle. For a more detailed
discussion of what can cause the overload of Diameter nodes, refer to discussion of what can cause the overload of Diameter nodes, refer to
the Diameter Overload Requirements [RFC7068]. the Diameter Overload Requirements [RFC7068].
This document defines a new overload report type to communicate This document defines a new overload report type to communicate
occurrences of agent overload. This report type works for the "Loss" occurrences of agent overload. This report type works for the "Loss"
overload mitigation algorithm defined in [I-D.ietf-dime-ovli] and is overload mitigation algorithm defined in [RFC7683] and is expected to
expected to work for other overload abatement algorithms defined in work for other overload abatement algorithms defined in extensions to
extensions to the DOIC solution. the DOIC solution.
2. Terminology and Abbreviations 2. Terminology and Abbreviations
Editors note - These definitions need to be made consistent with the
base Diameter overload specification defined in [I-D.ietf-dime-ovli].
Diameter Node Diameter Node
A RFC6733 Diameter Client, an RFC6733 Diameter Server, and RFC6733 A RFC6733 Diameter Client, an RFC6733 Diameter Server, and RFC6733
Diameter Agent. Diameter Agent.
Diameter Endpoint Diameter Endpoint
An RFC6733 Diameter Client and RFC6733 Diameter Server. An RFC6733 Diameter Client and RFC6733 Diameter Server.
Reporting Node Reporting Node
skipping to change at page 4, line 14 skipping to change at page 4, line 17
A DOIC Node that sends and overload report in a Diameter answer A DOIC Node that sends and overload report in a Diameter answer
message. message.
Reacting Node Reacting Node
A DOIC Node that receives and acts on a Diameter overload report. A DOIC Node that receives and acts on a Diameter overload report.
DIOC Node DIOC Node
A Diameter Node that supports the DOIC solution defined in A Diameter Node that supports the DOIC solution defined in
[I-D.ietf-dime-ovli]. [RFC7683].
3. Peer Report Use Cases 3. Peer Report Use Cases
This section outlines representative use cases for the peer report This section outlines representative use cases for the peer report
used to communicate agent overload. used to communicate agent overload.
There are two primary classes of use cases currently identified, There are two primary classes of use cases currently identified,
those involving the overload of agents and those involving overload those involving the overload of agents and those involving overload
of Diameter endpoints (Diameter Clients and Diameter Servers) that of Diameter endpoints (Diameter Clients and Diameter Servers) that
wish to use an overload algorithm suited controlling traffic sent wish to use an overload algorithm suited controlling traffic sent
skipping to change at page 5, line 22 skipping to change at page 5, line 22
Figure 2 Figure 2
In both of these cases, the occurrence of overload in the single In both of these cases, the occurrence of overload in the single
agent must by handled by the client in a similar fashion as if the agent must by handled by the client in a similar fashion as if the
client were handling the overload of a directly connected server. client were handling the overload of a directly connected server.
When the agent becomes overloaded it will insert an overload report When the agent becomes overloaded it will insert an overload report
in answer messages flowing to the client. This overload report will in answer messages flowing to the client. This overload report will
contain a requested reduction in the amount of traffic sent to the contain a requested reduction in the amount of traffic sent to the
agent. The client will apply overload abatement behavior as defined agent. The client will apply overload abatement behavior as defined
in the base Diameter overload specification [I-D.ietf-dime-ovli] or in the base Diameter overload specification [RFC7683] or the
the extension draft that defines the indicated overload abatement extension draft that defines the indicated overload abatement
algorithm. This will result in the throtting of the abated traffic algorithm. This will result in the throtting of the abated traffic
that would have been sent to the agent, as there is no alternative that would have been sent to the agent, as there is no alternative
route, with the appropriate indication given to the service request route, with the appropriate indication given to the service request
that resulted in the need for the Diameter transaction. that resulted in the need for the Diameter transaction.
3.1.2. Redundant Agents 3.1.2. Redundant Agents
Figure 3 and Figure 4 illustrate a second, and more likely, type of Figure 3 and Figure 4 illustrate a second, and more likely, type of
deployment scenario involving agents. In both of these cases, the deployment scenario involving agents. In both of these cases, the
client has Diameter connections to two agents. client has Diameter connections to two agents.
skipping to change at page 7, line 30 skipping to change at page 7, line 30
mitigation logic when receiving an agent overload report from agents mitigation logic when receiving an agent overload report from agents
a21 and a22. a21 and a22.
The handling of peer overload reports is similar to that discussed in The handling of peer overload reports is similar to that discussed in
section 2.2. If the overload can be addressed using diversion then section 2.2. If the overload can be addressed using diversion then
this approach should be taken. this approach should be taken.
If both of the agents have requested a reduction in traffic then the If both of the agents have requested a reduction in traffic then the
previous hop agent must start throttling the appropriate number of previous hop agent must start throttling the appropriate number of
transactions. When throttling requests, an agent uses the same error transactions. When throttling requests, an agent uses the same error
responses as defined in the base DOIC specification responses as defined in the base DOIC specification [RFC7683].
[I-D.ietf-dime-ovli].
3.2. Diameter Endpoint Use Cases 3.2. Diameter Endpoint Use Cases
This section outlines use cases for the peer overload report This section outlines use cases for the peer overload report
involving Diameter Clients and Diameter Servers. involving Diameter Clients and Diameter Servers.
3.2.1. Hop-by-hop Abatement Algorithms 3.2.1. Hop-by-hop Abatement Algorithms
It is envisioned that abatement algorithms will be defined that will It is envisioned that abatement algorithms will be defined that will
support the option for Diameter Endpoints to send peer reports. For support the option for Diameter Endpoints to send peer reports. For
instance, it is envisioned that one usage scenario for the rate instance, it is envisioned that one usage scenario for the rate
algorithm, [I-D.ietf-dime-doic-rate-control], which is being worked algorithm, [I-D.ietf-dime-doic-rate-control], which is being worked
on by the DIME working group as this is written, will involve on by the DIME working group as this document is being written, will
abatement being done on a hop-by-hop basis. involve abatement being done on a hop-by-hop basis.
This rate deployment scenario would involve Diameter Endpoints This rate deployment scenario would involve Diameter Endpoints
generating peer reports and selecting the rate algorithm for generating peer reports and selecting the rate algorithm for
abatement of overload conditions. abatement of overload conditions.
4. Interaction Between Host/Realm and Peer Overload Reports 4. Interaction Between Host/Realm and Peer Overload Reports
It is possible that both an agent and an end-point in the path of a It is possible that both an agent and an end-point in the path of a
transaction are overloaded at the same time. When this occurs, transaction are overloaded at the same time. When this occurs,
Diameter entities need to handle both overload reports. In this Diameter entities need to handle both overload reports. In this
skipping to change at page 8, line 22 skipping to change at page 8, line 22
to host or realm reports should then go through abatement for the to host or realm reports should then go through abatement for the
peer overload report. peer overload report.
5. Peer Report Behavior 5. Peer Report Behavior
This section defines the normative behavior associated with the Peer This section defines the normative behavior associated with the Peer
Report extension to the DOIC solution. Report extension to the DOIC solution.
5.1. Capability Announcement 5.1. Capability Announcement
Editor's Note: Issue - how does an agent indicate the selected
abatement algorithm? It cannot use the OC-Feature-Vector in the OC-
Supported-Features AVP as that applies to host and realm report
types. A new AVP in the OC-Supported-Features AVP has been added.
5.1.1. Reacting Node Behavior 5.1.1. Reacting Node Behavior
When sending a Diameter request a DOIC node that supports the Peer When sending a Diameter request a DOIC node that supports the
Report feature MUST include an OC-Supported-Features AVP with an OC- OC_PEER_REPORT feature MUST include an OC-Supported-Features AVP with
Feature-Vector AVP with the OLR_PEER_REPORT bit set. an OC-Feature-Vector AVP with the OC_PEER_REPORT bit set.
Note: The sender of a request can be a Diameter Client or Diameter Note: The sender of a request can be a Diameter Client or Diameter
Server that originates the Diamter request or a Diameter Agent Server that originates the Diamter request or a Diameter Agent
that relays the request. that relays the request.
Support for the peer report feature does not impact the logic for Support for the OC_PEER_REPORT feature does not impact the logic for
setting of other feature bits in the OC-Feature-Vector AVP. setting of other feature bits in the OC-Feature-Vector AVP.
When sending a request a DOIC node that supports the Peer Report When sending a request a DOIC node that supports the OC_PEER_REPORT
feature MUST include an OC-SourceID AVP in the OC-Supported-Features feature MUST include an OC-SourceID AVP in the OC-Supported-Features
AVP with its own DiameterID. AVP with its own DiameterIdentity.
Note: This allows the DOIC nodes in the path of the request to Note: This allows the DOIC nodes in the path of the request to
determine if the indication of support came from a Diameter peer determine if the indication of support came from a Diameter peer
or if the request traversed a node that does not support the peer or if the request traversed a node that does not support the
feature. OC_PEER_REPORT feature.
When relaying a request that includes an OC-SourceID AVP in the OC- When relaying a request that includes an OC-SourceID AVP in the OC-
Supported-Features AVP, a DOIC node that supuports the Peer Report Supported-Features AVP, a DOIC node that supuports the OC_PEER_REPORT
feature must remove the received OC-SourceID AVP and replace it with feature must remove the received OC-SourceID AVP and replace it with
an OC-SourceID AVP containing its own Diameter identity. an OC-SourceID AVP containing its own Diameter identity.
5.1.2. Reporting Node Behavior 5.1.2. Reporting Node Behavior
When receiving a request a DOIC node that supports the Peer Report When receiving a request a DOIC node that supports the OC_PEER_REPORT
feature MUST update transaction state with an indication of whether feature MUST update transaction state with an indication of whether
or not the peer from which the request was received supports the Peer or not the peer from which the request was received supports the
Report feature. OC_PEER_REPORT feature.
Note: The transaction state is used when the DOIC node is acting Note: The transaction state is used when the DOIC node is acting
as a peer-report reporting node and needs send OC-OLR reports of as a peer-report reporting node and needs send OC-OLR reports of
type PEER_REPORT in answer messages. The peer overload reports type PEER_REPORT in answer messages. The peer overload reports
are only included in answer messages being sent to peers that are only included in answer messages being sent to peers that
support the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature. support the OC_PEER_REPORT feature.
The following are indications that the peer does not support the The following are indications that the peer does not support the
OLR_PEER_REPORT feature: OC_PEER_REPORT feature:
The request does not contain an OC-Supported-Features AVP. The request does not contain an OC-Supported-Features AVP.
The received request contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with no The received request contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with no
OC-Feature-Vector. OC-Feature-Vector.
The received request contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with a The received request contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with a
OC-Feature-Vector with the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature bit cleared. OC-Feature-Vector with the OC_PEER_REPORT feature bit cleared.
The received request contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with a The received request contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with a
OC-Feature-Vector with the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature bit set but OC-Feature-Vector with the OC_PEER_REPORT feature bit set but with
with an OC-SourceID AVP with a DiameterID that does not match the an OC-SourceID AVP with a DiameterIdentity that does not match the
DiameterID of the peer from which the request was received. DiameterIdentity of the peer from which the request was received.
The peer supports the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature if the received request The peer supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature if the received request
contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with the OC-Feature-Vector with contains an OC-Supported-Features AVP with the OC-Feature-Vector with
the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature bit set and with an OC-SourceID AVP with the OC_PEER_REPORT feature bit set and with an OC-SourceID AVP with a
a Diameter ID that matches the DiameterID of the peer from which the Diameter ID that matches the DiameterIdentity of the peer from which
request was received. the request was received.
When relaying an answer message, a reporting node that supports the When relaying an answer message, a reporting node that supports the
OLR_PEER_REPORT feature MUST strip any SourceID AVP from the OC- OC_PEER_REPORT feature MUST strip any SourceID AVP from the OC-
Supported-Features AVP. Supported-Features AVP.
When sending an answer message, a reporting node that supports the When sending an answer message, a reporting node that supports the
OLR_PEER_REPORT feature MUST determine if the peer to which the OC_PEER_REPORT feature MUST determine if the peer to which the answer
answer is to be sent supports the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature. is to be sent supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature.
If the peer supports the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting If the peer supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting
node MUST indicate support for the feature in the Supported-Features node MUST indicate support for the feature in the Supported-Features
AVP. AVP.
If the peer supports the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting If the peer supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting
node MUST insert the OC-SourceID AVP in the OC-Supported-Features AVP node MUST insert the OC-SourceID AVP in the OC-Supported-Features AVP
in the answer message. in the answer message.
If the peer supports the OLR_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting If the peer supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting
node MUST insert the OC-Peer-Algo AVP in the OC-Supported-Features node MUST insert the OC-Peer-Algo AVP in the OC-Supported-Features
AVP. The OC-Peer-Algo AVP MUST indicate the overload abatement AVP. The OC-Peer-Algo AVP MUST indicate the overload abatement
algorithm that the reporting node wants the reacting nodes to use algorithm that the reporting node wants the reacting nodes to use
should the reporting node send a peer overload report as a result of should the reporting node send a peer overload report as a result of
becoming overloaded. becoming overloaded.
5.2. Peer Report Overload Report Handling 5.2. Peer Report Overload Report Handling
This section defines the behavior for the handling of overload This section defines the behavior for the handling of overload
reports of type peer. reports of type peer.
5.2.1. Overload Control State 5.2.1. Overload Control State
This section describes the Overload Control State (OCS) that might be This section describes the Overload Control State (OCS) that might be
maintained by both the peer report reporting node and the peer report maintained by both the peer report reporting node and the peer report
reacting node. reacting node.
5.2.1.1. Reporting Node Peer Report OCS 5.2.1.1. Reporting Node Peer Report OCS
A DOIC Node that supports the Peer Report feature SHOULD maintain A DOIC Node that supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature SHOULD maintain
Reporting Node Peer Report OCS. This is used to record overload Reporting Node Peer Report OCS. This is used to record overload
events and build overload reports at the reporting node. events and build overload reports at the reporting node.
If different abatement specific contents are sent to each peer then If different abatement specific contents are sent to each peer then
the reporting node MUST maintain a separate peer node peer report OCS the reporting node MUST maintain a separate peer node peer report OCS
entry per peer to which a peer overload report is sent. entry per peer to which a peer overload report is sent.
Note: The rate overload abatement algorithm allows for different Note: The rate overload abatement algorithm allows for different
rates to be sent to each peer. rates to be sent to each peer.
skipping to change at page 11, line 9 skipping to change at page 11, line 9
o Validity Duration o Validity Duration
o Expiration Time o Expiration Time
o Abatement Algorithm o Abatement Algorithm
o Algorithm specific input data (for example, the Reduction o Algorithm specific input data (for example, the Reduction
Percentage for the Loss Abatement Algorithm) Percentage for the Loss Abatement Algorithm)
5.2.1.2. Reacting Node Peer Report OCS 5.2.1.2. Reacting Node Peer Report OCS
A DOIC node that supports the Peer Report feature SHOULD maintain A DOIC node that supports the OC_PEER_REPORT feature SHOULD maintain
Reacting Node Peer Report OCS for each peer with which it Reacting Node Peer Report OCS for each peer with which it
communicates. This is used to record overload reports received from communicates. This is used to record overload reports received from
peer nodes. peer nodes.
A Reacting Node Peer Report OCS entry is identified by the DiameterID A Reacting Node Peer Report OCS entry is identified by the
of the peer as communicated during the RFC6733 defined Capability DiameterIdentity of the peer as communicated during the RFC6733
Exchange procedure. defined Capability Exchange procedure.
The Reacting Node Peer Report OCS entry MAY include the following The Reacting Node Peer Report OCS entry MAY include the following
information (the actual information stored is an implementation information (the actual information stored is an implementation
decision): decision):
o Sequence number o Sequence number
o Expiration Time o Expiration Time
o Abatement Algorithm o Abatement Algorithm
skipping to change at page 11, line 38 skipping to change at page 11, line 38
o Algorithm specific input data (for example, the Reduction o Algorithm specific input data (for example, the Reduction
Percentage for the Loss Abatement Algorithm) Percentage for the Loss Abatement Algorithm)
5.2.2. Reporting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS 5.2.2. Reporting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS
A reporting node SHOULD create a new Reporting Node Peer Report OCS A reporting node SHOULD create a new Reporting Node Peer Report OCS
entry Section 5.2.1.1 in an overload condition and sending a peer entry Section 5.2.1.1 in an overload condition and sending a peer
overload report to a peer for the first time. overload report to a peer for the first time.
If the reporting node knows that there are no reacting nodes If the reporting node knows that there are no reacting nodes
supporting the Peer Report feature then the reporting node can supporting the OC_PEER_REPORT feature then the reporting node can
choose to not create OCS entries. choose to not create OCS entries.
All rules for managing the reporting node OCS entries defined in All rules for managing the reporting node OCS entries defined in
[I-D.ietf-dime-ovli] apply to the peer report. [RFC7683] apply to the peer report.
5.2.3. Reacting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS 5.2.3. Reacting Node Maintenance of Peer Report OCS
When a reacting node receives an OC-OLR AVP with a report type of When a reacting node receives an OC-OLR AVP with a report type of
peer it MUST determine if the report was generated by the Diameter peer it MUST determine if the report was generated by the Diameter
peer from which the report was received. peer from which the report was received.
If the DiameterID in the SourceID contained in the OLR matches the If the DiameterID in the SourceID contained in the OLR matches the
DiameterID of the peer from which the request was received then the DiameterIdentity of the peer from which the request was received then
report was received from a Diameter peer. the report was received from a Diameter peer.
If a reacting node receives an OC-OLR AVP of type peer and the OC- If a reacting node receives an OC-OLR AVP of type peer and the OC-
SourceID does not match the ID of the Diameter peer from which the SourceID does not match the ID of the Diameter peer from which the
request was received then the reacting node MUST ignore the overload request was received then the reacting node MUST ignore the overload
report. report.
In all cases, if the reacting node is a relay then it MUST strip the In all cases, if the reacting node is a relay then it MUST strip the
OC-OLR AVP from the message. OC-OLR AVP from the message.
If the Peer Report OLR was received from a Diameter peer then the If the Peer Report OLR was received from a Diameter peer then the
reacting node MUST determine if it is for an existing or new overload reacting node MUST determine if it is for an existing or new overload
condition. condition.
The OLR is for an existing overload condition if the reacting node The OLR is for an existing overload condition if the reacting node
has an OCS that matches the received OLR. For a peer report-type has an OCS that matches the received OLR. For a peer report-type
this means the DiameterID received in the SourceID AVP matches the this means the DiameterIdentity received in the SourceID AVP matches
DiameterID of an existing peer report OLR. the DiameterIdentity of an existing peer report OLR.
If the OLR is for an existing overload condition then it MUST If the OLR is for an existing overload condition then it MUST
determine if the OLR is a retransmission or an update to the existing determine if the OLR is a retransmission or an update to the existing
OLR. OLR.
If the sequence number for the received OLR is greater than the If the sequence number for the received OLR is greater than the
sequence number stored in the matching OCS entry then the reacting sequence number stored in the matching OCS entry then the reacting
node MUST update the matching OCS entry. node MUST update the matching OCS entry.
If the sequence number for the received OLR is less than or equal to If the sequence number for the received OLR is less than or equal to
skipping to change at page 13, line 14 skipping to change at page 13, line 14
The reacting node sets the abatement algorithm based on the OC-Peer- The reacting node sets the abatement algorithm based on the OC-Peer-
Algo AVP in the received OC-Supported-Features AVP. Algo AVP in the received OC-Supported-Features AVP.
5.2.4. Peer Report Reporting Node Behavior 5.2.4. Peer Report Reporting Node Behavior
When there is an existing reporting node peer report OCS entry, the When there is an existing reporting node peer report OCS entry, the
reporting node MUST include an OC-OLR AVP with a report type of peer reporting node MUST include an OC-OLR AVP with a report type of peer
using the contents of the reporting node peer report OCS entry in all using the contents of the reporting node peer report OCS entry in all
answer messages sent by the reporting node to peers that support the answer messages sent by the reporting node to peers that support the
peer report feature. OC_PEER_REPORT feature.
The reporting node determines if a peer supports the peer report The reporting node determines if a peer supports the
feature based on the indication recorded in the reporting nodes OC_PEER_REPORT feature based on the indication recorded in the
transaction state. reporting nodes transaction state.
The reporting node MUST include its DiameterID in the OC-SourceID AVP The reporting node MUST include its DiameterIdentity in the OC-
in the OC-OLR AVP. This is used by DOIC nodes that support the peer SourceID AVP in the OC-OLR AVP. This is used by DOIC nodes that
report feature to determine if the report was received from a support the OC_PEER_REPORT feature to determine if the report was
Diameter peer. received from a Diameter peer.
The reporting agent must follow all other overload reporting node The reporting agent must follow all other overload reporting node
behaviors outlined in the DOIC specification. behaviors outlined in the DOIC specification.
5.2.5. Peer Report Reacting Node Behavior 5.2.5. Peer Report Reacting Node Behavior
A reacting node supporting this extension MUST support the receipt of A reacting node supporting this extension MUST support the receipt of
multiple overload reports in a single message. The message might multiple overload reports in a single message. The message might
include a host overload report, a realm overload report and/or a peer include a host overload report, a realm overload report and/or a peer
overload report. overload report.
skipping to change at page 13, line 52 skipping to change at page 13, line 52
For peer overload reports, the preferred abatement treatment is For peer overload reports, the preferred abatement treatment is
diversion. As such, the reacting node SHOULD attempt to divert diversion. As such, the reacting node SHOULD attempt to divert
requests identified as needing abatement to other peers. requests identified as needing abatement to other peers.
If there is not sufficient capacity to divert abated traffic then the If there is not sufficient capacity to divert abated traffic then the
reacting node MUST throttle the necessary requests to fit within the reacting node MUST throttle the necessary requests to fit within the
available capacity of the peers able to handle the requests. available capacity of the peers able to handle the requests.
If the abatement treatment results in throttling of the request and If the abatement treatment results in throttling of the request and
if the reacting node is an agent then the agent MUST send an if the reacting node is an agent then the agent MUST send an
appropriate error as defined in [I-D.ietf-dime-ovli]. appropriate error as defined in [RFC7683].
In the case that the OCS entry validity duration expires or has a In the case that the OCS entry validity duration expires or has a
validity duration of zero ("0"), meaning that it the reporting node validity duration of zero ("0"), meaning that it the reporting node
has explicitly signaled the end of the overload condition then has explicitly signaled the end of the overload condition then
abatement associated with the overload abatement MUST be ended in a abatement associated with the overload abatement MUST be ended in a
controlled fashion. controlled fashion.
6. Peer Report AVPs 6. Peer Report AVPs
6.1. OC-Supported-Features AVP 6.1. OC-Supported-Features AVP
This extension adds a new feature to the OC-Feature-Vector AVP. This This extension adds a new feature to the OC-Feature-Vector AVP. This
feature indication shows support for handling of peer overload feature indication shows support for handling of peer overload
reports. Peer overload reports are used by agents to indicate the reports. Peer overload reports are used by agents to indicate the
need for overload abatement handling by the agents peer. need for overload abatement handling by the agents peer.
A supporting node must also include the OC-SourceID AVP in the OC- A supporting node must also include the OC-SourceID AVP in the OC-
Supported-Features capability AVP. Supported-Features capability AVP.
This AVP contains the Diameter Identity of the node that supports the This AVP contains the Diameter Identity of the node that supports the
OLR_PEER_REPORT feature. This AVP is used to determine if support OC_PEER_REPORT feature. This AVP is used to determine if support for
for the peer overload report is in an adjacent node. The value of the peer overload report is in an adjacent node. The value of this
this AVP should be the same Diameter identity used as part of the AVP should be the same Diameter identity used as part of the CER/CEA
CER/CEA base Diameter capabilities exchange. base Diameter capabilities exchange.
This extension also adds the OC-Peer-Algo AVP to the OC-Supported- This extension also adds the OC-Peer-Algo AVP to the OC-Supported-
Features AVP. This AVP is used by a reporting node to indicate the Features AVP. This AVP is used by a reporting node to indicate the
abatement algorithm it will use for peer overload reports. abatement algorithm it will use for peer overload reports.
OC-Supported-Features ::= < AVP Header: TBD1 > OC-Supported-Features ::= < AVP Header: TBD1 >
[ OC-Feature-Vector ] [ OC-Feature-Vector ]
[ OC-SourceID ] [ OC-SourceID ]
[ OC-Peer-Algo] [ OC-Peer-Algo]
* [ AVP ] * [ AVP ]
6.1.1. OC-Feature-Vector 6.1.1. OC-Feature-Vector
The peer report feature defines a new feature bit is added for the The peer report feature defines a new feature bit is added for the
OC-Feature-Vector AVP. OC-Feature-Vector AVP.
OLR_PEER_REPORT (0x0000000000000010) OC_PEER_REPORT (0x0000000000000010)
When this flag is set by a DOIC node it indicates that the DOIC When this flag is set by a DOIC node it indicates that the DOIC
node supports the peer overload report type. node supports the peer overload report type.
6.1.2. OC-Peer-Algo 6.1.2. OC-Peer-Algo
The OC-Peer-Algo AVP (AVP code TBD1) is of type Unsigned64 and The OC-Peer-Algo AVP (AVP code TBD1) is of type Unsigned64 and
contains a 64 bit flags field of announced capabilities of a DOIC contains a 64 bit flags field of announced capabilities of a DOIC
node. The value of zero (0) is reserved. node. The value of zero (0) is reserved.
Feature bits defined for the OC-Feature-Vector AVP and associated Feature bits defined for the OC-Feature-Vector AVP and associated
with overload abatement algorithms are reused in for this AVP. with overload abatement algorithms are reused in for this AVP.
Editor's node: This is to avoid the need for an additional IANA
registry.
6.2. OC-OLR AVP 6.2. OC-OLR AVP
This extension makes no changes to the SequenceNumber or This extension makes no changes to the SequenceNumber or
ValidityDuration AVPs in the OC-OLR AVP. These AVPs are also be used ValidityDuration AVPs in the OC-OLR AVP. These AVPs are also be used
in peer overload reports. in peer overload reports.
The peer report feature extends the base Diameter overload The OC_PEER_REPORT feature extends the base Diameter overload
specification by defining a new overload report type of "peer". See specification by defining a new overload report type of "peer". See
section [7.6] in [I-D.ietf-dime-ovli] for a description of the OC- section [7.6] in [RFC7683] for a description of the OC-Report-Type
Report-Type AVP. AVP.
The overload report must also include the Diameter identity of the The overload report must also include the Diameter identity of the
agent that generated the report. This is necessary to handle the agent that generated the report. This is necessary to handle the
case where there is a non supporting agent between the reporting node case where there is a non supporting agent between the reporting node
and the reacting node. Without the indication of the agent that and the reacting node. Without the indication of the agent that
generated the overload request, the reacting node could erroneously generated the overload request, the reacting node could erroneously
assume that the report applied to the non supporting node. This assume that the report applied to the non supporting node. This
could, in turn, result in unnecessary traffic being either could, in turn, result in unnecessary traffic being either
redistributed or throttled. redistributed or throttled.
The OC-SourceID AVP is used in the OC-OLR AVP to carry this The OC-SourceID AVP is used in the OC-OLR AVP to carry this
DiameterID. DiameterIdentity.
OC-OLR ::= < AVP Header: TBD2 > OC-OLR ::= < AVP Header: TBD2 >
< OC-Sequence-Number > < OC-Sequence-Number >
< OC-Report-Type > < OC-Report-Type >
[ OC-Reduction-Percentage ] [ OC-Reduction-Percentage ]
[ OC-Validity-Duration ] [ OC-Validity-Duration ]
[ OC-Source-ID ] [ OC-Source-ID ]
* [ AVP ] * [ AVP ]
6.2.1. OC-Report-Type AVP 6.2.1. OC-Report-Type AVP
skipping to change at page 16, line 35 skipping to change at page 16, line 27
6.4. Attribute Value Pair flag rules 6.4. Attribute Value Pair flag rules
+---------+ +---------+
|AVP flag | |AVP flag |
|rules | |rules |
+----+----+ +----+----+
AVP Section | |MUST| AVP Section | |MUST|
Attribute Name Code Defined Value Type |MUST| NOT| Attribute Name Code Defined Value Type |MUST| NOT|
+--------------------------------------------------------+----+----+ +--------------------------------------------------------+----+----+
|OC-SourceID TBD1 x.x Unsigned64 | | V | |OC-SourceID TBD1 x.x DiameterIdentity | | V |
|OC-Peer-Algo TBD2 x.x Unsigned64 | | V | |OC-Peer-Algo TBD2 x.x Unsigned64 | | V |
+--------------------------------------------------------+----+----+ +--------------------------------------------------------+----+----+
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
Editors note: This section will be completed once the base overload 7.1. AVP codes
document has finished the definition of extension IANA requirements.
New AVPs defined by this specification are listed in Section 6. All
AVP codes are allocated from the 'Authentication, Authorization, and
Accounting (AAA) Parameters' AVP Codes registry.
7.2. New registries
There are no new IANA registries introduced by this document.
The values used for the OC-Peer-Algo AVP are the subset of the "OC-
Feature-Vector AVP Values (code 622)" registry. Only the values in
that registry that apply to overload abatement algorithms apply to
the OC-Peer-Algo AVP.
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
Agent overload is an extension to the base Diameter overload Agent overload is an extension to the base Diameter overload
mechanism. As such, all of the security considerations outlined in mechanism. As such, all of the security considerations outlined in
[I-D.ietf-dime-ovli] apply to the agent overload scenarios. [RFC7683] apply to the agent overload scenarios.
It is possible that the malicious insertion of an agent overload It is possible that the malicious insertion of an agent overload
report could have a bigger impact on a Diameter network as agents can report could have a bigger impact on a Diameter network as agents can
be concentration points in a Diameter network. Where an end-point be concentration points in a Diameter network. Where an end-point
report would impact the traffic sent to a single Diameter server, for report would impact the traffic sent to a single Diameter server, for
example, a peer report could throttle all traffic to the Diameter example, a peer report could throttle all traffic to the Diameter
network. network.
This impact is amplified in an agent that sits at the edge of a This impact is amplified in an agent that sits at the edge of a
Diameter network that serves as the entry point from all other Diameter network that serves as the entry point from all other
skipping to change at page 17, line 32 skipping to change at page 17, line 38
Ben Campbell for his insights and review of early versions of this Ben Campbell for his insights and review of early versions of this
document. document.
10. Normative References 10. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dime-doic-rate-control] [I-D.ietf-dime-doic-rate-control]
Donovan, S. and E. Noel, "Diameter Overload Rate Control", Donovan, S. and E. Noel, "Diameter Overload Rate Control",
draft-ietf-dime-doic-rate-control-01 (work in progress), draft-ietf-dime-doic-rate-control-01 (work in progress),
March 2015. March 2015.
[I-D.ietf-dime-ovli]
Korhonen, J., Donovan, S., Campbell, B., and L. Morand,
"Diameter Overload Indication Conveyance", draft-ietf-
dime-ovli-08 (work in progress), February 2015.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
[RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Ed., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn, [RFC6733] Fajardo, V., Ed., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
Ed., "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733, Ed., "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6733, October 2012, DOI 10.17487/RFC6733, October 2012,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6733>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6733>.
[RFC7068] McMurry, E. and B. Campbell, "Diameter Overload Control [RFC7068] McMurry, E. and B. Campbell, "Diameter Overload Control
Requirements", RFC 7068, DOI 10.17487/RFC7068, November Requirements", RFC 7068, DOI 10.17487/RFC7068, November
2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7068>. 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7068>.
[RFC7683] Korhonen, J., Ed., Donovan, S., Ed., Campbell, B., and L.
Morand, "Diameter Overload Indication Conveyance",
RFC 7683, DOI 10.17487/RFC7683, October 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7683>.
Author's Address Author's Address
Steve Donovan Steve Donovan
Oracle Oracle
7460 Warren Parkway, Suite 300 7460 Warren Parkway, Suite 300
Frisco, Texas 75034 Frisco, Texas 75034
United States United States
Email: srdonovan@usdonovans.com Email: srdonovan@usdonovans.com
 End of changes. 57 change blocks. 
102 lines changed or deleted 103 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.44. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/