Hi Samuel,

  *
If Marina or anybody else is trying to build PCE, which is interoperable with 
such PCC, then they will need to solve that problem from PCE side.

Fair point, but, if those/any implementations don’t implement a new proposal 
extensions either, then it still will not be interoperable. It seems to me if 
there’s already a RFC defined interoperable solution (delegate on-orphan), 
shouldn’t the motivation and drive be in that direction to get implementation 
rather than add more to the protocol behaviour and require changes to both PCC 
and PCE?

Thanks
Andrew

From: Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 at 7:38 AM
To: Andrew Stone (Nokia) <[email protected]>, Marina Fizgeer 
<[email protected]>, Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Marina Fizgeer <[email protected]>
Subject: [Pce] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: PCE WG Minutes for IETF 124


CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links 
or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.



Hi all,

Andrew - I agree with you that this solution seems to be most simple (and 
that’s why I believe both - Nokia and Cisco has it implemented), but I know 
about PCC at least from one other vendor, which does not seem to support such 
behavior (no automatic re-delegation by PCC). If Marina or anybody else is 
trying to build PCE, which is interoperable with such PCC, then they will need 
to solve that problem from PCE side.

Marina - I would personally prefer simpler solution, which is slightly less 
optimal from encoding POV, but which does not need to add support for 3 new 
notification types and does not need advertisement of delegation timer value of 
other PCEs - just use extension introduced in:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-fizgeer-pce-redundancy-extensions-00.html#name-lsp-object
So probably solution #1 from your list of possible solutions. When delegation 
timer expires, “Delegation Address” flag would be cleared for all impacted 
LSPs. All PCEs will know delegation can be reclaimed for those LSPs. It can be 
still combined with new capability indicating whether PCC can do automatic 
re-delegation described by Andrew - if yes, then such notifications can be 
skipped as PCC will take of re-delegation anyway.

Regards,
Samuel

From: Andrew Stone (Nokia) <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, 18 November 2025 at 00:21
To: Marina Fizgeer <[email protected]>, Dhruv Dhody 
<[email protected]>, Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Marina Fizgeer <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] [Pce] Re: PCE WG Minutes for IETF 124

Hi Marina,

I'll raise the same comment/question I had on the mic at ietf-124: what are the 
concerns with PCC just delegating the lsp to another active session when it 
becomes an orphan?

This is an option specified in RFC8231 Section 5.7.5 and RFC8281 section 6. 
Yes, your slides do point this as being an option ("possible solution: bullet 
5) but does not seem to outline why it's not an acceptable solution. As we 
discussed in session and you do indeed have on your slides, this would simply 
be a local preferencing, regardless if there's 1,2,3 or 5 PCEs.

Would this not be simpler? It involves no new extensions, and no new message 
exchange or definitions, and already RFC specified.

My concerns with a notify-like behavior to require PCE to ask for delegation is 
from a few angles, such as:


  *
You now need to notify all PCE(s) everytime delegation state changes, per path. 
This is noise that did not necessarily exist before. A notification will happen 
both for delegation removal, and re-delegation (when no longer orphaned) -> to 
all connected PCEs.
  *
The final delegation is non-determistic if there's > 2 PCEs. If there are 3 or 
more, and the active one fails, it will be a race condition between the other 
PCE's as to which one will succeed in grabbing delegation. Perhaps it does not 
matter at the end of the day, but it does become an operational consideration 
and aids to troubleshooting headaches
  *
There's additional overhead for -all- PCEs and affected PCC interaction: notify 
not delegated, ask for delegation (race condition), then report delegation (to 
the winning PCE) and notify delegation info (to the other PCEs). It's quite a 
lot more messaging, compared to just PCC simply sending PcRpt+Delegate to the 
next-best-preference PCE
  *
Consider that a death of PCE is likely to affect a large number of PCCs, the 
above bullet points can involve a lot of messaging and processing.

Thanks
Andrew



From: Marina Fizgeer <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, November 17, 2025 at 5:12 PM
To: Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]>, Andrew Stone (Nokia) 
<[email protected]>, Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>, Marina Fizgeer <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [Pce] Re: PCE WG Minutes for IETF 124


CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links 
or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.


Hello,
Please help me move forward with the PCE Redundancy issues and my proposal. We 
discussed the need for a dedicated additional meeting to discuss existing 
options and my proposal. I've tried to analyze this in the attached document. 
What should be the next steps? Thank you in advance.
Best regards,

[Logo]<https://ribboncommunications.com/>
Marina Fizgeer
Sr. Manager, Systems Architecture | Ribbon
M +972.544860016
Petah Tikva,  Israel
[Banner]<https://ribboncommunications.com/?_gl=1*6qlbuc*_gcl_au*MjA3NzE5OTk5NC4xNzI4NDE0NDY4*_ga*NTIxNzg1MDgxLjE3Mjg0MTQ0NjM.*_ga_VCEZ9Q3S3Y*MTcyODQ1MjEzMC4yLjEuMTcyODQ1MjE4OS4xLjAuMTA4NjExNTU4>


From: Marina Fizgeer
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 5:42 PM
To: 'Dhruv Dhody' <[email protected]>; Andrew Stone (Nokia) 
<[email protected]>; Samuel Sidor (ssidor) 
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [Pce] Re: PCE WG Minutes for IETF 124

Hi, dear friends,
Following up on my presentation and our discussion at the EITF 124 PCE meeting, 
I am sending the supplement a presentation with a detailed description of the 
problem, the options we have thought about and our proposed solution, which 
seems to me simple to implementation and flow itself.

Your opinion is very important to me. Thank you in advance.

Best regards,

[Logo]<https://ribboncommunications.com/>
Marina Fizgeer
Sr. Manager, Systems Architecture | Ribbon
M +972.544860016
Petah Tikva,  Israel
[Banner]<https://ribboncommunications.com/?_gl=1*6qlbuc*_gcl_au*MjA3NzE5OTk5NC4xNzI4NDE0NDY4*_ga*NTIxNzg1MDgxLjE3Mjg0MTQ0NjM.*_ga_VCEZ9Q3S3Y*MTcyODQ1MjEzMC4yLjEuMTcyODQ1MjE4OS4xLjAuMTA4NjExNTU4>


From: Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2025 6:50 AM
To: Andrew Stone (Nokia) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Pce] Re: PCE WG Minutes for IETF 124

Hi,

Thanks Andrew!

I made some tiny edits, you can find the latest version at - 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-124-pce-202511061430/

Thanks!
Dhruv


On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 5:22 AM Andrew Stone (Nokia) 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
wrote:
Hi PCE WG,

Please find the minutes for PCE WG session at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/materials/minutes-124-pce-202511061430-00.md

Thanks to those who contributed to the minutes.

Please reach out to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> in case any 
correction needs to be made.

Thanks,
Andrew (PCE Secretary)

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>



Disclaimer

This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information of Ribbon 
Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or proprietary 
for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure, reliance or 
distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly 
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to