Hello,

I do not believe this document is ready for adoption. I believe the WG
perhaps needs to discuss some basic concepts before taking up this work.

Please note that I do not object to (what I infer is) the motivation for
this work. This document is not (yet) a good starting point for this work.

1) We need a SPRING WG document that covers the considerations related to
Path MTU for SR Policies. We do not have such a document today. While this
document does touch upon certain aspects, it is inadequate. This document
should focus more on the PCEP protocol aspects and rely on the existing
RSVP-TE spec RFC3209 and TBD for SR Policy for the application to the
respective constructs. Note that draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu
introduces this PMTU for BGP SRTE [*]

2) There seems to be some degree of mixup between the concept of (a)
constraint for the path and (b) the reporting of the calculated path MTU of
the path. Both are perhaps needed, but we need them to be unambiguous and
differentiated. I would think that (a) is also very useful. And I am not
sure if it is appropriate to refer to (b) as a "metric" - isn't it a
property?

3) This is applicable for both RSVP-TE and SR Policy.

[*] What I see is that some amount of uncoordinated protocol spec
development related to SPRING constructs is happening in the
protocol-specific WGs (PCE & IDR) without the base work being done in the
SPRING WG. I had raised this point during the IDR document adoption as
well: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/ZrN1-Uw1ggyxKeltBICmcthjymM/


Thanks,
Ketan



On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:40 PM Dhruv Dhody <d...@dhruvdhody.com> wrote:

> Hi WG,
>
> This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu/
>
> Should this draft be adopted by the PCE WG? Please state your reasons -
> Why / Why not? What needs to be fixed before or after adoption? Are you
> willing to work on this draft? Review comments should be posted to the list.
>
> Please respond by Monday 11th April 2022.
>
> Thanks!
> Dhruv & Julien
> _______________________________________________
> 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