Re: [pcp] draft-ietf-pcp-proxy-01

Hi Tiru,

Many thanks for the comments. 

Please see inline.

Cheers,
Med 

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) [mailto:tireddy@cisco.com] 
>Envoyé : vendredi 21 décembre 2012 07:43
>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; pcp@ietf.org
>Objet : Re: [pcp] draft-ietf-pcp-proxy-01
>
>Hi Med,
>
>Comments
>
>[1] Section 3 PCP Server Discovery and Provisioning : 
>You may also want to add details that PCP Proxy would use 
>similar mechanism just like PCP client to discover the PCP server.

Med: I updated the text with an explicit ref to Section 8.1 of draft-ietf-pcp-base.

>
>[2] Section 5 Control of the Firewall : 
>Firewall rules would be typically to block any unsolicited 
>traffic from outside to inside. For PCP request/response this 
>will not be a problem, but would have issues with unsolicited 
>ANNOUNCE. In this case PCP Authentication looks mandatory to 
>handle man-in-middle attacks trying to act as PCP Server.

Med: is that a problem even if the pcp server is known to the pcp proxy?

>
>[3] Section 5 : Replace REMOTE_PEER_FILTER with FILTER option

Med: Fixed. Thanks.

>
>[4] Section 8 MAP/PEER handling : you may also want to clarify 
>PCP proxy behavior when PCP client uses THIRD_PARTY option.

Med: I updated the text to explicitly require the PCP server follows the pcp server recommendations detailed in section 13.1 of draft-ietf-pcp-base.

>
>[5] Section 10.1 Multiple PCP servers : There could be another 
>scenarios that PCP proxy would forward the PCP request to one 
>of the PCP servers depending on the fields set in PCP request 
>(for specific use cases please refer to 
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rpcw-pcp-pmipv6-serv-discovery
>-00 , 
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-02#
>section-8)]
>

Med: what change you want to see in that section? Thanks.

>[6] How is it ensured that only the PCP proxy can communicate 
>with the PCP server and not any other PCP client ?

Med: Should this be part of the PCP Proxy spec?

>
>--Tiru.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pcp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
>> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 5:33 PM
>> To: pcp@ietf.org
>> Subject: [pcp] draft-ietf-pcp-proxy-01
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> A new version is now available online:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcp-proxy-01
>> 
>> The main changes in -01 are as follows:
>> 
>> * The reference architecture is updated: the PCP proxy is 
>not restricted to
>> the CP router deployment case.
>> * Add a new section to specify the behaviour when the PCP 
>Proxy is not
>> co-located with a NAT function
>> * Add a new section for mappings repair
>> * More discussion for the multiple PCP Servers scenario
>> * Text is cleanup
>> 
>> A detailed diff is available here:
>> 
>>  http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pcp-proxy-01
>> 
>> Please review this new version and provide input.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Med
>> _______________________________________________
>> pcp mailing list
>> pcp@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp
>
>