Thanks, Julien.
Once upon a time, I was quite skeptical about this idea, and unhappy to see it progress. But I have become used to the idea, and two things help me believe we should adopt this:
1. As an Experiment, this can be tried out and we can see how well it works. If it is nonsense, no harm done. The authors' willingness to proceed as Experimental is reassuring.
2. The applicability to optical networks (separate draft) is convincing because it is easier to believe that optical devices do not want to add BGP-LS to their code stack (even if it is only a couple of thpusand lines of code).
So, I support adoption and commit to working with the authors to improve the draft.
I think the current description of the Experiment is pretty good, but work will be needed to sort out the IANA stuff. I just posted a draft to help with Experimental Error-Types.
Best,
Adrian
On 04/04/2024 18:18 CEST julien.meu...@orange.com wrote:Hi all,We have a long history around PCEP-LS. The rough consensus has been toprogress it as experimental within the PCE WG, which makes more sensethan an independent submission.As a result, do you support draft-dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls-27 [1] to becomea PCE WG document? Please share your feedback using the PCE mailinglist, including your comments and especially your rationales in caseyou're opposed.Thank you,Julien---_______________________________________________Pce mailing list
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
