Hi Ran,
Thanks for your comments.
I will fix the IANA request to "TBD1,2,3" in next version.
Best Regards,
Quan
Original
From: 陈然
To: d...@dhruvdhody.com <d...@dhruvdhody.com>;pce@ietf.org
<pce@ietf.org>;draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-posit...@ietf.org
<draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-posit...@ietf.org>;
Cc: pce-cha...@ietf.org <pce-cha...@ietf.org>;
Date: 2024年02月06日 09:05
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-position-10
Hi Dhruv and WG,
I surport the adoption of this draft, it is very useful. but I have a few minor
(non-blocking) comments:
7.1. New SR PCE Capability Flag Registry
TBD11 is very strange. It is recommended to number it in the order of TBD1,
2..., or remove the number.
7.3 New SR-ERO Flag Registry
I did not find that IANA assigned 36 for ELP Configuration (E) flag, and please
check https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#sr-ero-flag-field . Did
I miss something?
Best Regards,
Ran
From: DhruvDhody <d...@dhruvdhody.com>
To: pce@ietf.org <pce@ietf.org>;
Cc: pce-chairs
<pce-cha...@ietf.org>;draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-posit...@ietf.org
<draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-posit...@ietf.org>;
Date: 2024年01月27日 00:50
Subject: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-position-10
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
Hi WG,
This email begins the WG adoption poll for
draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-position-10
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-peng-pce-entropy-label-position/
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 12th Feb 2024.
Please be more vocal during WG polls!
Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
