Subject: [pcp] ticket 42: PEER OpCode: remove internal-ip-address, introduce THIRD_PARTY OpCode

From: "Dan Wing" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:18:00 -0800

Currently, the PEER OpCodes contain an internal IP address in their 
payloads.  See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcp-base-04#page-37

The internal IP address is not necessary for the common case -- the
common case being where an application is trying to determine the 
lifetime of its own NAT/firewall mappings.  It seems PEER has even 
_less_ use for 3rd party query/control than MAP.  

But like MAP, 3rd party query/control is necessary when PCP 
is being proxied _and_ when the user's CPE is not a NAT (e.g., 
the B4 element in a Dual-Stack Lite deployment).

I suggest that internal-ip-address be removed from the PEER OpCodes
entirely, and use a separate THIRD_PARTY option.  This would bring
PEER and MAP to function the same way.

I just opened a new ticket on that, ticket #42,
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/pcp/trac/ticket/42

Please reply to this thread on this topic.

-d