Xian, 

The idea of only doing an incremental sync is very useful, I think the 
requirements are valid for cases where large dbs are involved. As Jon 
mentioned, it is not applicable to all scenarios, and one must always weight 
the cost in extra complexity vs the benefit. 

My original email was to make sure the wg is aware of the other sync-related 
changes in the stateful pce draft, since I don’t think many people have had a 
chance to read the draft.

The draft might want to expand on how to determine what is missing, correlation 
between version db and srp-id-numbers or other mechanisms to avoid having to 
keep unbounded state for the purpose of cross-checking, errors in this process 
and recovery from them.

Thanks, 

Ina 

-----Original Message-----
From: Zhangxian (Xian) [mailto:zhang.x...@huawei.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 12:33 AM
To: Ina Minei
Cc: pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt

Hi, Ina, 

     Yes; we are aware of this and so from protocol extensions point of view, 
this draft does follow the use of related flags defined there. 

    However, the intention of these two PCE-triggered action are different. In 
this new draft, it aims to allow the PCE to control the timing of LSP state 
synchronization (even before its LSP DB is up-to-date) across PCEP sessions. 
While in draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-05 intends to allow sanity check by PCE 
after the stateful PCE is fully functional (aka with full LSP-DB). 

    What do you think of the draft itself? Do you think the requirements are 
valid? 

Regards,
Xian

________________________________________
发件人: Ina Minei [i...@juniper.net]
发送时间: 2013年7月9日 3:48
到: Zhangxian (Xian); pce@ietf.org
主题: RE: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt

One minor comment for those of you who might be reviewing this draft, please be 
aware that Pce-triggered sync is also covered in 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-05#section-5.5.4 (though 
the entire database is exchanged in that case).

Ina

-----Original Message-----
From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zhangxian 
(Xian)
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 2:59 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for 
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt

Hi, Dear PCErs,

      We have just upload a new draft specifying the need in PCEP to allow 
incremental LSP state synchronization as well as PCE control over this process 
for stateful PCE(s).  It also proposes PCEP extensions to support the 
requirements.

       Any comments/feedback are appreciated.

Regards,
Xian ( on behalf of all authors)

________________________________________
发件人: internet-dra...@ietf.org [internet-dra...@ietf.org]
发送时间: 2013年7月7日 19:41
到: Zhangxian (Xian); Xiegang (A); Dhruv Dhody
主题: New Version Notification for draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Xian Zhang and posted to the IETF repository.

Filename:        draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync
Revision:        00
Title:           LSP Synchronization for Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE)
Creation date:   2013-07-05
Group:           Individual Submission
Number of pages: 7
URL:             
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
Status:          http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync
Htmlized:        http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00


Abstract:
   The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides
   mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path
   computations in response to Path Computation Clients (PCCs) requests.

   [Stateful-pcep] specifies a set of extensions to PCEP to enable
   stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via
   PCEP and maintaining of these LSPs at the stateful PCE.  This
   document describes the mechanisms for incremental LSP Database (LSP-
   DB) synchronization as well as PCE control of the LSP-DB
   synchronization process.




The IETF Secretariat
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to