Subject: [pcp] a remak about 'upgraded'

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:25:15 +0200

In base 16 9.3 page 39:

   ... If an implicit mapping
   already exists for the requested Internal Address and Port, the
   mapping SHOULD be upgraded to an explicit mapping.

the term 'upgraded' is deliberately loose, in fact many things can
happen, for instance:
 - the implicit mapping is promoted to an explicit mapping (works
  well (only?) with EIM and shared external port space)
 - the implicit mapping is deleted and a new explicit mapping is
  created (EDM, the external port will remain the same if external
  port space is shared, i.e., 12.1 1 is not used)
 - the implicit mappings are deleted (because with EDM you can get
  more than one using of course different external ports), etc.

Regards

[email-masked]

PS: this is NOT a request to change the base spec (I proposed
the term 'upgraded' so you can assume I am fine with it :-).