IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pcp] #75 (third-party-id-option): Dave Thaler's comments on draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-00

"pcp issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Wed, 02 September 2015 10:24 UTC

Return-Path: <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB46F1A904C for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 03:24:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DqopaZZo5pYk for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 03:24:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 763051A6F32 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 03:24:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:42769 helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <trac@tools.ietf.org>) id 1ZX5DJ-0002Mc-79; Wed, 02 Sep 2015 03:24:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: pcp issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.5
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.5, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option@tools.ietf.org, rapenno@yahoo.com, quittek@neclab.eu
X-Trac-Project: pcp
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 10:24:21 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/pcp/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/pcp/trac/ticket/75#comment:3
Message-ID: <074.6d1df354ea582f192d72f2a23412923a@tools.ietf.org>
References: <059.b391db7d29982cc510d59e4791c48b07@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 75
In-Reply-To: <059.b391db7d29982cc510d59e4791c48b07@tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option@tools.ietf.org, rapenno@yahoo.com, quittek@neclab.eu, pcp@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option@ietf.org
Resent-Message-Id: <20150902102423.763051A6F32@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 03:24:23 -0700
Resent-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pcp/Bi3Ku7eJPaKmHFy89n4aNukSTlE>
Cc: pcp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pcp] #75 (third-party-id-option): Dave Thaler's comments on draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-00
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: PCP wg discussion list <pcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 10:24:25 -0000

#75: Dave Thaler's comments on draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-00


Comment (by quittek@neclab.eu):

 Point 5) has been addressed on the mailing list on January 16, see
 https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pcp/W7eNVG6QNYDMpJhu6LXbdUQDR04

 There was no objection on the explanation given in this email on the
 mailing list or in the issue tracker.

 Below please find the relevant text from this email:

 > > > 5) Section 5.3 on processing a response has a new requirement
 > > > "SHOULD report an error"
 > > >      which is not in RFC 6887 section 11.4 or 12.4.   Is this really
 a
 > > > requirement?  I'm ok
 > > >     either way, but not sure why this specific error response would
 > > > be special in terms
 > > >     of what should be reported to somewhere.
 > > >

 Reporting an error is kept in the text.
 Without reporting an error we wouldn't need a diversity of error codes
 because the PCP client can't recover from using a wrong identifier on its
 own
 and most probably must be re-configured manually by the subscriber.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-
  dthaler@microsoft.com  |  option@tools.ietf.org
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major        |   Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  third-       |     Version:  1.0
  party-id-option        |  Resolution:
 Severity:  In WG Last   |
  Call                   |
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/pcp/trac/ticket/75#comment:3>
pcp <http://tools.ietf.org/pcp/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email