Hi Jerry, Thanks for the feedback and comments.
Please see inline, > -----Message d'origine----- > De : ASH, GERALD R, ATTLABS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Envoyé : samedi 3 mars 2007 01:54 > À : LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc : ASH, GERALD R, ATTLABS > Objet : RE: [Pce] draft-leroux-pce-of-00.txt > > Hi JL, > > Looks like a good start. > > Looking through the IANA section, I don't see registration of > the objective functions (OFs) required in Section 5.1.17 of > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-leroux-pce-of-00.txt: > > " The PCECP MUST support at least the following "unsynchronized" > functions: > > - Minimum cost path with respect to a specified metric > (shortest path) > - Least loaded path > - Maximum available bandwidth path > > Also, the PCECP MUST support at least the following "synchronized" > objective functions: > > - Minimize aggregate bandwidth consumption on all links > - Maximize the residual bandwidth on the most loaded link > - Minimize the cumulative cost of a set of diverse paths" > > Shouldn't these standard OFs and their parameters be > registered from the start? Actually we prefer to keep this draft generic, and define specific objective functions in other documents. For instance draft-lee-pce-global-concurrent-optimization-02.txt requests for three code points within the OF registry. > > It would also be useful to illustrate how each of these OFs > are encoded, perhaps in an illustrative appendix. > > How can new OFs be specified, >i.e., how will extensibility of > OFs and their parameters be accommodated? The OF is identified by a 16 bit code point. A document that defines a new OF will request IANA for a code point within the OF code point registry. We will clarify in next revision. Regards, JL > > Thanks, > Regards, > Jerry > > ________________________________ > > From: LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Pce] draft-leroux-pce-of-00.txt > > Hi all, > > This new draft defines PCED and PCEP extensions for the > encoding of objective functions. > We are waiting for WG feedback/comments. > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-leroux-pce-of-00.txt. > > Regards, > > JL > _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
