Hi Dhruv, As an author of this draft, I would like to thank the Chairs of both WGs for the guidance. We will post the PCE document and start drafting the SPRING one.
Thank you! Best Regards, Shuping From: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:d...@dhruvdhody.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 11:17 AM To: pce@ietf.org Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-p...@ietf.org; spring-cha...@ietf.org Subject: Re: WG Adoption of draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05 Hi WG, Thanks for providing your feedback and discussion on the adoption of this draft. The discussion on this thread as well as a chat with the SPRING chairs confirms the need for a document in the SPRING WG that can be referred to by the protocol extensions in PCE (and IDR). There is also no opposition to the actual protocol work in PCE. Thus, the chairs conclude the adoption poll and adopt this I-D in the PCE WG. The chairs also ask the authors (and whoever is willing to contribute) to produce a document in the SPRING WG in parallel and continue the discussion on the SPRING mailing list. Post-adoption, the PCE document would need to remove any duplicate content and refer to the spring document instead. Thanks! Dhruv & Julien On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:39 PM Dhruv Dhody <d...@dhruvdhody.com<mailto: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
