RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking-07

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Wed, 10 April 2013 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636FF21F8F1A; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.400, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DDkryKzKuuaK; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A066121F8F17; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm06.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.2]) by omfedm11.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 135533B47E9; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:49:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from puexch91.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.48]) by omfedm06.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id A1ABB27C0B4; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:49:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.7]) by puexch91.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.48]) with mapi; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:49:26 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com>, "draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking.all@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:49:25 +0200
Subject: RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking-07
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking-07
Thread-Index: AQGru2VgIxcOQENUYzhlyQVOZ0pm1wHHP5CkmQTyuICAANuqoA==
Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36EC1AE796C@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
References: <054201ce34fa$0746ec80$15d4c580$@akayla.com> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36EC1AE76B6@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <059701ce3554$235aa0b0$6a0fe210$@akayla.com>
In-Reply-To: <059701ce3554$235aa0b0$6a0fe210$@akayla.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: fr-FR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2013.4.10.65417
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 08:12:52 -0700
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:49:28 -0000

Dear Peter,

I changed the text as follows:

OLD:

   If the requested external port is not available, the PCP server will
   send a CANNOT_PROVIDE_EXTERNAL error response.  If a short lifetime
   error is returned, the IGD-PCP IWF MAY re-send the same request to
   the PCP Server after 30 seconds.  If a PCP error response is
   received, the IGD-PCP IWF relays a negative message to the UPnP
   Control Point with ConflictInMappingEntry as the error code.

NEW:

   If the requested external port is not available, the PCP server will
   send a CANNOT_PROVIDE_EXTERNAL error response:

   1.  If a short lifetime error is returned, the IGD-PCP IWF MAY resend
       the same request to the PCP Server after 30 seconds without
       relaying the error to the UPnP Control Point.  The IGD-PCP IWF
       MAY repeat this process until a positive answer is received or
       some maximum retry limit is reached.  When the maximum retry
       limit is reached, the IGD-PCP IWF relays a negative message to
       the UPnP Control Point with ConflictInMappingEntry as the error
       code.

   2.  If a long lifetime error is returned, the IGD-PCP IWF relays a
       negative message to the UPnP Control Point with
       ConflictInMappingEntry as the error code.

Better?

Cheers,
Med

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Peter Yee [mailto:peter@akayla.com]
>Envoyé : mardi 9 avril 2013 20:58
>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-
>interworking.all@tools.ietf.org
>Cc : gen-art@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
>Objet : RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking-07
>
>Med,
>	Thanks for the swift response to my review.  See my one reply
>inline.
>
>		Kind regards,
>		-Peter
>
>>>Page 13, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: what's meant here is if any PCP
>>>error other than a short-lifetime error, or in the case of a failed
>>>resend, any PCP error at all.  The wording makes it seem like the
>>>short-lifetime errors are somehow not PCP errors and is therefore
>>>confusing.  It also doesn't explicitly deal with how many repeats should
>be done on a resend.
>
>>[Med] The basic behavior is to relay the received error to the UPnP CP.
>For
>the short-lifetime errors, the IWF may decide to resend the request and not
>relay those errors immediately to the UPnP CP. The number of repeats is not
>specified here as it can be implementation-specific.
>
>Your explanation is fine.  I just found the wording "If a PCP  error
>response is received" to sound ambiguously as if the short-lifetime errors
>were not a subset of PCP errors.
>