It would be cleaner to not require .P2PDevice methods to be issued on a group interface. In other words, args['group_object'] could be used to specify the group or this method could be moved to be a .Group PresenceRequest() method.

It would be cleaner to not require .P2PDevice methods to be issued on a group interface. In other words, this would either need to be Disconnect(group_object) or moved to be a .Group Disconnect() method.

What is this trying to indicate? It does not make much sense to have a P2PDevice property role since there can be multiple concurrent groups and the P2P Device role is always active anyway.

What is this trying to indicate? It does not make much sense to have a P2PDevice property Group since there can be multiple concurrent groups.

What is this trying to indicate? It does not make much sense to have a P2PDevice property PeerGO since there can be multiple concurrent groups.

This should really be renamed since "IEs" means something completely different..