IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pcp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-10.txt

"Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)" <ssenthil@cisco.com> Wed, 27 February 2013 11:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ssenthil@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E67D21F84F3 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 03:20:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8CdVql258f0l for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 03:20:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B2721F84CA for <pcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 03:20:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2342; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1361964017; x=1363173617; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=1eqmOTu9jBUc0f59gEQPaieOeJ9iQFy9lK2+yeisk3I=; b=bCK5X8GdLTJVaoDcZGAjpYuigbfsIyEjM681RGiGpwYjTFp61eMGS7Ms i80F5Cr8D6bxNpm2WBUlRtv8casvWOL6sCUbBxwG/b1+x1CGM2q1QrgsE 9c+oLAybAg71VNJU0FlW8FlBIJOWs1m3qEumUdAofoEGSW6qmVXPF7lzA 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAPHqLVGtJXG9/2dsb2JhbABEwhZ5FnOCIQEEAQEBawkCEgEIIh0uCxQRAgQBDQUIiAsMviAEjmMxB4JfYQOINJ53gwiCJw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,746,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="181710868"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Feb 2013 11:20:17 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x06.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x06.cisco.com [173.37.183.80]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r1RBKHRn002052 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:20:17 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.5.42]) by xhc-rcd-x06.cisco.com ([173.37.183.80]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:20:16 -0600
From: "Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil)" <ssenthil@cisco.com>
To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
Thread-Topic: [pcp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-10.txt
Thread-Index: AQHOFNxrvRRIV6HCgUe9NPn20sDhTA==
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:20:16 +0000
Message-ID: <CB1B483277FEC94E9B58357040EE5D02323DFF44@xmb-rcd-x15.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36EB47D714C@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.1.130117
x-originating-ip: [10.65.70.103]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <B08A6C4BEA999C4F9670F182C605C34B@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-10.txt
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:20:21 -0000

Please see inline.

On 2/27/13 5:48 AM, "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com"
<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:

>
>Hi Simon,
>
>Please see inline.
>Cheers,
>Med 
>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : Simon Perreault [mailto:simon.perreault@viagenie.ca]
>>Envoyé : mercredi 27 février 2013 11:29
>>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN
>>Cc : Dan Wing; pcp@ietf.org
>>Objet : Re: [pcp] Fwd: New Version Notification for
>>draft-tsou-pcp-natcoord-10.txt
>>
>>Le 2013-02-27 07:45, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com a écrit :
>>>> 1. The "P" bit comes from pcp-base's reserved range.  That
>>bit is not
>>>> assignable to an option (layering violation).
>>>
>>> Med: Ok to move the parity bit to the option data field.
>>
>>Just to be clear, this would increase the option length to 3
>>bytes, right?
>
>Med: 3 is just fine.
>
>>
>>Should we increase it to 4 for padding's sake?
>
>Med: Padding will be needed but it is not needed to be reflected in the
>option length. 
>
>>
>>>> 3. natcoord-10 says "If the Port Set Size is zero or one, a
>>>> MALFORMED_OPTION error is returned."  Disallowing a port set size of
>>>> one seems overly restrictive, especially when later in the same
>>>> section there is allowance that if the server cannot fulfill the
>>>> requested port set size, the server maps one port.  I agree a port
>>>> set size of 0 is nonsensical.
>>>
>>> Med: It does not make sense to include a PORT_SET to ask for
>>one single port. The text you are referring to is when the
>>port set size > 1.
>>
>>Well, it is clear that PORT_SET size of 1 is of little usefulness, but
>>it can make sense if you just focus on the semantics. The are the same
>>as a PORT_SET-less MAP request.
>
>Med: Yes, we can be tolerant or strict. What if this point is defined as
>a configuration option to Section 5: the server should be configured to
>ignore an option with port_set_size=1 or return an error message +
>default behaviour is to return an error message?

Unless there is a use case that requires a size to be 1, it doesn¹t make
sense to allow 1 as an allowed value. I am not aware of any such use case.
Let's see if Dan has one.

Senthil 

>_______________________________________________
>pcp mailing list
>pcp@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email