Hi Robert, Yes, you are right.
Best Regards Fatai 发件人: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Robert Varga 发送时间: 2012年11月10日 0:43 收件人: pce@ietf.org 主题: Re: [Pce] 答复: Questions about stateful PCE, relation to WG charter and opinion about stateful PCE On 11/09/2012 09:20 AM, Fatai Zhang wrote: Hi Jan, Hi Fatai, >The PCE is not limited to path computation only. The PCE can set other LSP >parameters as well: RFC5440 defines objects for bandwidth, setup & hold >priorities, the local protection flag, etc. More LSP parameters have been >added in subsequent RFCs and drafts. [Fatai] I have to indicate that PCE cannot *set* other LSP parameters. The parameters (eg., bandwidth, priorities, etc) you mentioned are only used for *path computation*. I agree. The PCE does not set *any* parameters of the LSP. Only PCC can do that PCC. PCE can only provide suggestions and must be fully prepared to have them rejected. I am not aware of any restriction on what information a PCE is allowed to suggest to be modified, apart from the fact that ERO and BANDWIDTH are explictly included in that set (section 5.1.5 of RFC4657). Bye, Robert
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce