Subject: Re: [pcp] WGLC: draft-ietf-pcp-server-selection-02.txt comments due by FEB 21

From: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 10:32:18 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Perreault [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:50 PM
> To: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy); Prashanth Patil (praspati); [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [pcp] WGLC: draft-ietf-pcp-server-selection-02.txt comments due
> by FEB 21
> 
> Le 2014-02-25 22:08, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) a écrit :
> >>>>> 5.  Example: Multiple PCP servers on a Single Interface
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    Figure 1 depicts an example that is used to illustrate the server
> >>>>>    selection procedure specified in Section 3.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>                                ISP Network
> >>>>>                              |              |
> >>>>>        .........................................................
> >>>>>                              |              |        Subscriber Network
> >>>>>                      +-------+------+  +----+---------+
> >>>>>                      | PCP-Server-A |  | PCP-Server-B |
> >>>>>                      |              |  |              |
> >>>>>                      +-------+------+  +----+---------+
> >>>>>             192.0.2.1        |              |     198.51.100.1
> >>>>>             2001:db8:2222::1 |              |     2001:db8:3333::1
> >>>>>                              |              |
> >>>>>                              |              |
> >>>>>                       -------+--------------+-----------
> >>>>>                                      |
> >>>>>                                      |    203.0.113.0
> >>>>>                                      |    2001:db8:1111::1
> >>>>>                                  +---+---+
> >>>>>                                  | Host  |
> >>>>>                                  +-------+
> >>>>>
> >>>>>                                  Figure 1
> >
> > Can you please provide more details why this figure needs to be updated ?
> 
> Because:
> 
> 1. The PCP servers look like routers. They should not be connected at the top.

Yes, the PCP servers are co-located with the routers.

> 
> 2. The PCP-controlled device(s) is/are not shown. We don't know whether there
> are two PCP servers controlling a single device or two PCP servers each
> controlling its own device.

It's two PCP servers each controlling its own device. we will add more info in the next revision to clarify 
about this figure.

-Tiru

> 
> Simon
> --
> DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
> NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
> STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca