Subject: Re: [pcp] Proposed text to add to pcp-base

From: "Reinaldo Penno (repenno)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 14:12:34 +0000

From: Dave Thaler <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 03:41:12 +0000
To: "[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Proposed text to add to pcp-base

Here’s the text Dan came up with to address the keepalive incentive issue
which the WG agreed to add text about.

In Section 12.3, "Processing a PEER Request":

OLD:

   Processing the lifetime value of the PEER Opcode is described in

   Section 15.  Sending a PEER request with a very short Requested

   Lifetime can be used to query the lifetime of an existing mapping.

NEW:

   Processing the lifetime value of the PEER Opcode is described in

   Section 15.  Sending a PEER request with a very short Requested

|  Lifetime can be used to query the lifetime of an existing mapping.

|  So that PCP clients can reduce the frequency of their NAT and

| firewall keepalive messages, it is RECOMMENDED that lifetimes  of

| mappings created or lengthened with PEER be longer than the  lifetimes

| of implictly-created mappings.

This appears to match what we agreed to in the meeting.

Let us know if there are any objections to the above wording.

-Dave