On Jul 14, 2006, at 12:14 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
o) on the I flag issue is identical why include an object
which has not considered during computation ?
I don't catch your point, the PCC may want to know the
constraints that were not taken into account during path
computation, this sounds quite important isn'it?
there are so
many things that the PCE has not taken into account during
computation so why bother ?
Hum I don't follow you here "there are so many things...",
What do you mean?
I think the disconnect is that the I flag is only used in
constraints *returned* to the PCC. I.e. in constraints that formed
part of the original request, but were ignored. There is no
requirement (or desire?) for the PCE to randomly report other
things it did not take into account (such as weather, shoe-size of
operator, etc.)
Correct (since if the PCE does not support or decided to ignore a
mandatory object), it would send a PCErr message.
Thanks.
JP.
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
