[pcp] [I-D.ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking] Issue #2: DeletePortMappingRange()
<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Tue, 29 November 2011 13:48 UTC
Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 CC8E521F8557 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 05:48:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.58
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.132, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sqgxN6PuFKVv for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 05:48:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98C021F8540 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 05:48:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omfedm07.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.3]) by omfedm14.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id A285322C4EC for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:48:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCH51.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.31]) by omfedm07.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 851FE4C071 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:48:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.8]) by PUEXCH51.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.31]) with mapi; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:48:20 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:48:19 +0100
Thread-Topic: [I-D.ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking] Issue #2: DeletePortMappingRange()
Thread-Index: AcyunY1rG0MLmAHvQ4WuPC9gCVMVNg==
Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F35A8D050CE3@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
Accept-Language: fr-FR
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: fr-FR
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F35A8D050CE3PUEXCB1Bnante_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 5.5.9.395186, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2011.8.30.163314
Subject: [pcp] [I-D.ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking] Issue #2: DeletePortMappingRange()
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: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:48:22 -0000
Dear all,
Context: When DeletePortMappingRange() is used,
* the IGD-PCP IWF undertakes a lookup on its local mapping table
to retrieve individual mappings instantiated by the requested
Control Point and matching the signalled port range
* If no mapping is found, "730 PortMappingNotFound" error code is
sent to the UPnP Control Point
* If a set of mappings are found, the IGD-PCP IWF generates
individual PCP MAP delete requests corresponding to these
mappings
Question (optimization) Do we allow the IWF to send a positive
answer to the requesting UPnP Control Point without waiting to
receive all answers from the PCP Server?
It is unlikely to encounter a problem in the PCP leg because
the IWF has verified authorization rights and also the presence
of the mapping in the local table
Cheers,
Med
- [pcp] [I-D.ietf-pcp-upnp-igd-interworking] Issue … mohamed.boucadair