Re: [pcp] WG Call for Adoption: draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-09

Dear Dan,

Thanks for your comments. Please see inline ~~

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pcp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> > Reinaldo Penno (repenno)
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 3:35 PM
> > To: pcp@ietf.org
> > Subject: [pcp] WG Call for Adoption: draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-09
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > This email starts a 2-week consensus call on adopting
> >
> >      Title     : Using PCP To Coordinate Between the CGN and Home
> > Gateway
> >      Author(s) : Q. Sun et al
> >      Filename  : draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-09.txt
> >      URL       : http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-09.txt
> >
> > Please read the current revision and state you opinion either for or
> > against adoption (and with reasoning why) in the mailing list.
>
> The Applicability section, title, and section 2 need to be clarified
> if PCP-NATCOORD works with PRR, works with CGN (as defined by
> draft-ietf-behave-lsn-requirements), or only works with
> draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite.  Some of the Applicability
> section
> is
> actually in section 2, where section 2 says:
>
>    ... This mechanism can be applied for lightweight 4over6
>    [I-D.cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite] in port-set allocation
>    process.  It can also be applied to stateless PCP-controlled device,
>    in which the Internal address, External address and Port set is
>    determined algorithmically.
>
> Yet, section 6 says "Normally, the PCP server for MAP_PORT_SET will
> not run NAT" which conflicts with the document's own title ("Using
> PCP To Coordinate Between the CGN and Home Gateway").
>
>
> [Qiong] Thanks for your suggestion. We will clarify it more clearly.
PCP_NATCOORD can not only work with
draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite, but can also work with PRR
(either using internal IPv4 address, or IPv6 address). In the current
draft, "the PCP server for MAP_PORT_SET will not run NAT" because the home
gateway will run NAT instead of PCP server, but it would be easy to modify
the draft to address the use cases which Reinaldo has pointed out in
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pcp/current/msg02664.html. The WG can
decide which applicabilities should go in it when we agree that we should
start work on this port-set Opcode.
For the title and content in section 1 and 2, we will take reconsider it
once the applicability of MAP_PORT_SET has been determined by the WG.

>
> Nit: Figure 2 shows a 24 bit Reserved field, but the description
> says it is 16 bits.  Also, Figure 2 has a cut/paste mistake
> with Suggested Port Set Index (should be Assigned Port Set Index).
>
[Qiong] Thanks ! We will fix it.

>
> What is the status of draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite in
> SOFTWIRE?
>
[Qiong] As far as I know, the concensus from the Atlanta meeting is that
draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite would be moved forward after the
softwire WG has a unified CPE draft covering both lightweight 4over6 and
MAP.

Hope it clarifies. Thanks !

Best wishes
Qiong

>
> -d
>
>
> > The call for adoption ends 16th January 2013.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > pcp mailing list
> > pcp@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp
>
> _______________________________________________
> pcp mailing list
> pcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp
>

-- 
==============================================
Qiong Sun
China Telecom Beijing Research Institude

Open source code:
lightweight 4over6: *http://sourceforge.net/projects/laft6/*
PCP-natcoord:* http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/ *
===============================================