Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option-01.txt
<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Fri, 11 July 2014 14:45 UTC
Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
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 9B1CF1B2908 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 07:45:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
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 O_NjsA74gIR0 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 07:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02EB01B28F6 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 07:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.1]) by omfedm13.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 758BD324236; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:45:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [10.114.31.55]) by omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 56DA135C05A; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:45:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([169.254.2.67]) by OPEXCLILH03.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([10.114.31.55]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:45:28 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Andreas Ripke <Andreas.Ripke@neclab.eu>, "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option-01.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPl3Ond1s//Hsjp0CcLYDTq0HzY5uPv3hAgAezYcCAAA2OgIAAU4rggAMmp6CAAAPKEA==
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:45:27 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933003175D@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <20140704103500.20587.59638.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2D2FFE4726FAF74285C45D69FDC30E798D60089F@DAPHNIS.office.hd> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933002F541@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <2D2FFE4726FAF74285C45D69FDC30E798D602C81@Hydra.office.hd> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933002F965@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <2D2FFE4726FAF74285C45D69FDC30E798D607FF9@Hydra.office.hd>
In-Reply-To: <2D2FFE4726FAF74285C45D69FDC30E798D607FF9@Hydra.office.hd>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.5]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.3.2322014, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2014.6.25.81224
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pcp/F7fgh5TnhM6KM0m9_n-YWftheQE
Subject: Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option-01.txt
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:45:32 -0000
Hi Andreas, I'm curious to see how this can work with legacy CPEs. Looking forward to reading an updated version of the draft. Cheers, Med >-----Message d'origine----- >De : Andreas Ripke [mailto:Andreas.Ripke@neclab.eu] >Envoyé : vendredi 11 juillet 2014 16:42 >À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; pcp@ietf.org >Objet : RE: New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option- >01.txt > >Hi Med, > >Thanks for the hint on UPnP relay. This might not be necessary. >Apparently, we have to describe the scenario in more detail. > >Best, > >Andreas > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com >> [mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 4:27 PM >> To: Andreas Ripke; pcp@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id- >option- >> 01.txt >> >> Re-, >> >> Please see inline. >> >> Cheers, >> Med >> >> >-----Message d'origine----- >> >De : Andreas Ripke [mailto:Andreas.Ripke@neclab.eu] Envoyé : mercredi 9 >> >juillet 2014 12:02 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; pcp@ietf.org Objet : >> >RE: New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option- >> >01.txt >> > >> >Hi Med, >> > >> >Thanks for your comments. >> > >> >Our scenario is a supplement to situations when PCP is not yet on hand >> >in the subscriber realm. >> >The carrier IWF is offered as a service to the subscribers. >> >It does not prevent subscribers to directly use PCP to control ports on >> >the CGN. >> >> [Med] But how the CPE will decide to leak UPnP IGD outside the LAN? >> Shouldn't this require an upgrade of the CPE to support some "kind" of >UPnP >> IGD relay? >> >> > >> >And thanks for your pointer to your pcp-sfc draft. >> >It looks like the PCP TUNNEL_ID option aligns to this direction of an >> >extension proposal. >> > >> >The decision we called the new option TUNNEL_ID was driven by the given >> >scenario. >> >Yes, it might be an idea to change and generalize the option name to ID >> >instead of TUNNEL_ID. >> >> [Med] Great! >> >> > >> >Best, >> > >> >Andreas >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com >> >> [mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 10:42 AM >> >> To: Andreas Ripke; pcp@ietf.org >> >> Subject: RE: New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id- >> >option- >> >> 01.txt >> >> >> >> Hi Andreas, >> >> >> >> Thank you for sharing this updated version of the document. >> >> >> >> I'm not sure about the carrier-hosted IWF because one of the >> >> motivations for PCP to avoid overloading the carrier network with a >> chatty protocol. >> >> >> >> FWIW, I have identified in this document as case that require an >> >> identification information that cannot be included in a THIRD_PARTY >> >option: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-pcp-sfc-classifier-control- >00 >> >> " o Extended THIRD_PARTY option to include a L2 identifier (e.g., >MAC >> >> address), an opaque subscriber-identifier, an IMSI, etc." >> >> >> >> I suggest you change TUNNEL_ID to something that won't mislead the >> >> reader that a tunneling technique is always in place when this option >> >> is >> >in >> >> use. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Med >> >> >> >> >-----Message d'origine----- >> >> >De : pcp [mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Andreas Ripke >> >> >Envoyé : vendredi 4 juillet 2014 13:05 À : pcp@ietf.org Objet : >> >> >[pcp] >> >> >FW: New Version Notification for draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id- >> >> >option-01.txt >> >> > >> >> >Dear all, >> >> > >> >> >Thank you for all the feedback we received at the last meeting on >> >> >the TUNNEL_ID option. This was very helpful. We have updated our >> >> >draft accordingly and aligned our use case with use cases from >> >> >existing PCP drafts/RFCs. Particularly we moved the focus from a >> >> >rather static web portal scenario to a more dynamic UPnP Interworking >> scenario. >> >> > >> >> >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option >> >> >-01 >> >> >.txt >> >> > >> >> >Please have a look at the draft and give us your feedback. >> >> > >> >> >Best regards, >> >> > >> >> >Andreas >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >NEC Europe Ltd | Registered Office: Athene, Odyssey Business Park, >> >> >West End Road, London, HA4 6QE, GB | Registered in England 2832014 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >A new version of I-D, draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option-01.txt >> >> >has been successfully submitted by Andreas Ripke and posted to the >> >> >IETF repository. >> >> > >> >> >Name: draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id-option >> >> >Revision: 01 >> >> >Title: PCP Tunnel-ID Option >> >> >Document date: 2014-07-03 >> >> >Group: Individual Submission >> >> >Pages: 10 >> >> >URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ripke-pcp- >> >tunnel- >> >> >id-option-01.txt >> >> >Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ripke-pcp- >tunnel- >> >id- >> >> >option/ >> >> >Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ripke-pcp-tunnel-id- >> >> >option-01 >> >> >Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ripke-pcp- >tunnel- >> >id- >> >> >option-01 >> >> > >> >> >Abstract: >> >> > This document describes a new Port Control Protocol (PCP) option >> >> > called TUNNEL_ID. It serves for identifying a Third Party in >> >> > addition to the means that PCP's THIRD_PARTY option already >provides >> >> > for that purpose. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> >> >submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >> >> >tools.ietf.org. >> >> > >> >> >The IETF Secretariat >> >> > >> >> >_______________________________________________ >> >> >pcp mailing list >> >> >pcp@ietf.org >> >> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp
- [pcp] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ripk… Andreas Ripke
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… Andreas Ripke
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… Andreas Ripke
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… RAFAEL ALEJANDRO LOPEZ DA SILVA
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… RAFAEL ALEJANDRO LOPEZ DA SILVA
- Re: [pcp] New Version Notification for draft-ripk… Markus Stenberg