Hi, Changed the subject line since the comments now apply to section 7.5 draft-ietf-pce-pcep-00.txt
I agree with Dimitri. The next needs to be cleaned a little because it implies that the end points of the requested computation are the end points of the TE LSP. It is also interesting to consider whether it would be useful to the PCE to know the actual end points of the service for which this computation is providing a segment. Fells like it might be, but unless we can actually see that reason now, we should leave the information out, and only add it when we discover the need. Cheers, Adrian > arch. document section 6.6 mentions > > "The path computation request may include a significant set of > requirements including: > > - the source and destination of the path" > > ... there is an underlying question beside this, is it the > source/destination of the LSP or is it the source/destination between > which path computation has to be performed and that may correspond to the > source/destination of the LSP itself > > the side point is that in that the notion of path was since so far linked > to the signaling protocol hence linked to the notion of LSP, but it in the > context of a PCE this notion does not necessarily hold anymore, e.g., one > coudl request for the computation of a path between point A and point B (A > being not the sourceof the LSP and B being not the destination of the LSP) > even if there is no a 1:1 relationship between the entity corresponding to > the path between A and B and the way the signaling protocol translate the > "path segment" between A and B > > The request applies for a path computation between a point A and a point B > (the source and destination). The text does not imply that the source and > the destination of such path correspond to the source and destination of > the TE LSP ? > > [dp] so, the source and destination (as listed) is the source and > destination of the path to be computed and not the source and destination > of the LSP (for which this computation is requested) it is thus worth > dropping a couple of lines concerning this relationship to avoid any > further confusion; indeed, when i look at the interpretation done in PCEP > the situation is not the one described in the architecture document > > "7.5. END-POINTS Object > > The END-POINTS object is used in a PCReq message to specify the > source IP address and the destination IP address of the TE LSP for > which a path computation is requested. Two END-POINTS objects (for > IPv4 and IPv6) are defined." > > this said, having the computation request scope decoupled from the LSP > reach is of primary importance _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
