Dear PCE,
Following our presentation in Bangkok,
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/materials/slides-103-pce-23-binding-segment-00.pdf
The authors would like to ask the WG the following:
(1) Do we link the Binding SID to the PCEP SR capability? Currently we
can assign BSID for RSVP-TE LSP as well.
(2) Is WG happy with TE-PATH-BINDING TLV format?
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Binding Type (BT) | Binding Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Binding Value (continued) (variable length) ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: TE-PATH-BINDING TLV
(3) Is there a use case for binding value as “index” in SRGB/SRLB?
Thanks!
Cheers,
Jeff
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce