Hi,
Thanks, I'll reflect your changes.
JP.
On Nov 18, 2005, at 11:28 AM, dimitri papadimitriou wrote:
hi jp
comments in-line
[snip]
5) Discussion on the PCE Discovery protocol (Jean-Louis Le Roux -
15mn)
draft-leroux-pce-disco-proto-igp-00.txt
See slides for content
JP> one of the strengths is that you use existing ISIS Router
capability TLV and OSPF Router Information LSA with no change in
term of elements of procedures.
JP> it's fair to make the assumption that it could be easily used
Dimitri> we may need another protocol for extensions?
[replace by] Dimitri> We may then need another protocol when the
discovery mechanism will be extended to the inter-AS case
[snip]
Adrian> both requirements and solution need to be restructured?
Dimitri> requirement document could have been written another way
but focus is solution
[rephrase] Dimitri> the requirement document could have been
written another way but focus is now on the solution (document)
[snip]
Dimitri> you're expecting that you will get the whole path, not a
partial path. It has been suggested to use this or that pce if
you're going to compute the path
[rephrase] Dimitri> You're expecting that you will get the whole
path, not a partial path; it should be possible (as previously
discussed) to include as part of the signaling request an explicit
indication about which PCE is suggested to be used for ERO
expansion purposes ?
---
JP Vasseur wrote:
Dear WG,
You can find the Draft of the PCE WG meeting minutes at the
following location:
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05nov/minutes/pce.txt
Thanks to Richard Rabbat anb Scott Brim for the notes.
Let us know if you have comments by November 28th.
Thanks.
JP.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
