Re: [pcp] Fw:I-D Action: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-08.txt

[Qiong <[e-mail]>]

Dear Dan,

For the second comment, please see inline :)


On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Dan Wing <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Qiong [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 5:19 AM
> > To: Dan Wing
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [pcp] Fw:I-D Action: New Version Notification for draft-
> > tsou-pcp-natcoord-08.txt
> >
> > Dear Dan,
> >
> > Thanks a lot for your review :) Please see inline
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:07 AM, Dan Wing <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >       > -----Original Message-----
> >       > From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
> > Behalf Of
> >       > Qiong
> >       > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:41 AM
> >       > To: [e-mail]
> >       > Subject: [pcp] Fw:I-D Action: New Version Notification for draft-
> > tsou-
> >
> >
> >       The draft needs to consider what happens when the port-sets overlap
> >       or are supersets of each other.  Especially how the Mapping Nonce
> >       is handled in that situation.
> >
> >
> > [Qiong] In the draft, we say "However, this port set indicated in the
> > request of the PCP Client is only a hint; it is up to the PCP Server to
> > assign a port set". So the PCP server can guarantee that the port-sets
> > will not overlap with each other, right ?
>
>
> Let's say the PCP server assigns ports 100-199.  Then, because of another
> request from the CPE, the PCP server assigns ports 200-299.  The draft
> needs to explain if that second PCP response will be indicate just ports
> 200-299, or if it will indicate ports 100-299.  The server could send
> either sort of response back, so it should more clearly explain that the
> CPE needs to handle either response, or declare the 100-299 response
> as illegal, or something.
>
> [Qiong] Right, we should make it clear. The PCP server should assign
individual port-set for each MAP_PORT_SET request, rather than an
aggregated one. This would simpilfy the implementation both for the pcp
server and pcp client, right?

Thanks for your comments!

Best wishes
Qiong

>
> > Besides, since the pcp-controlled device can identify each client with
> > the internal address(IPv6 address), I think there will be no confusion
> > in PCP servers to assgin non-overlap port-set to clients.
> >
> > I will add it explicitly in draft as a requirement to PCP server. Is it
> > ok ?
>
> -d
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-08 says:
> >
> >         The Client MUST use a different Mapping Nonce for
> >         different MAP_PORT_SET requests.
> >
> >       This is a MUST, which means there must be something that breaks if
> >       it violates that requirement.  What breaks?
> >
> >
> >
> > [Qiong] This is used when one pcp-natcoord client is allowed to initiate
> > multiple port-set requests in case it has used out all the ports in one
> > port-set. As a result, one pcp client may get multiple mapping rules
> > including the same Internal address, external address and different
> > port-sets. In this case, one mapping rule should have one corresponding
> > mapping nonce, and the server should also keep the Nonce value for each
> > port-set mapping. Otherwise, the pcp server can not get the distinction
> > between a port-set request retransimission when the request is somehow
> > lost and a new port-set request to get another port-set mapping, since
> > the suggested port-set might be zero in both cases and the Internal
> > address, protocol is the same. So when the client is going to request a
> > new port-set, a different Mapping Nonce should be used with the previous
> > port-set request. Does it make sense ? Hope it clarifies -:)
> >
> > Thanks again for your comments !
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Qiong
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       -d
> >
> >
> >
> >       > BTW, you can also find the opensource project in sourceforge:
> >       > http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/
> >       >
> >       >
> >       > Thanks a lot!
> >       >
> >       > Best wishes
> >       >
> >       > --
> >       > ==============================================
> >       > Qiong Sun
> >       > China Telecom Beijing Research Institude
> >       >
> >       >
> >       > Open source code:
> >       > lightweight 4over6: http://sourceforge.net/projects/laft6/
> >       > PCP-natcoord: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/
> >       > ===============================================
> >       >
> >       >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ==============================================
> > Qiong Sun
> > China Telecom Beijing Research Institude
> >
> >
> > Open source code:
> > lightweight 4over6: http://sourceforge.net/projects/laft6/
> > PCP-natcoord: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/
> > ===============================================
> >
> >
>
>
>


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


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