[Pce] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-pce-applicability-actn-10

[Yingzhen Qu via Datatracker]

Reviewer: Yingzhen Qu
Review result: Has Nits

Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review. The purpose of the review is
to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the
Routing Directorate, please see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
updating the draft.

Document: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-applicability-actn/
Reviewer: Yingzhen Qu
Review Date: 1 April 2019
IETF LC End Date: 23 February 2019
Intended Status: Informational

Summary:
An informational RFC is being requested by this document. This document
examines the applicability of PCE to ACTN framework.

Comments:
This document is clearly written and easy to understand. I have only a few
nitty comments that should be considered prior to publication..

Major Issues:
No major issues found.

Minor Issues:
No minor issues found.

Nits:
1. Page 7, section 3, why is NETCONF not included?
2. page 11. “need PCE as a important function.” Should be “need PCE as an
important function.” 3. page 13. The paths from A to C, why is B31-B34 not
there? 4. page 14. Section “VN Protection”, “need to applied to” should be
“need to be applied to” 5. page 14.
 “In case PNC generates an abstract topology to the MDSC, the
  PCInitiate/PCUpd messages from the MDSC to a PNC will contain a
  path with abstract nodes and links.”
Should it be  “from the MDSC to a PNC” or “from the MDSC to the PNC”?

Thanks,
Yingzhen


___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

[Pce] Last Call: (Extensions to Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for Hierarchical Path Computation Elements (PCE)) to Proposed Standa

[The IESG]

The IESG has received a request from the Path Computation Element WG (pce) to
consider the following document: - 'Extensions to Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP)
   for Hierarchical Path Computation Elements (PCE)'
   as Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
i...@ietf.org mailing lists by 2019-04-15. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of
the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


   The Hierarchical Path Computation Element (H-PCE) architecture is
   defined in RFC 6805.  It provides a mechanism to derive an optimum
   end-to-end path in a multi-domain environment by using a hierarchical
   relationship between domains to select the optimum sequence of
   domains and optimum paths across those domains.

   This document defines extensions to the Path Computation Element
   Protocol (PCEP) to support Hierarchical PCE procedures.





The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-hierarchy-extensions/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-hierarchy-extensions/ballot/

The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3422/





___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

[Pce] PCE WG Minutes

[Dhruv Dhody]

Hi WG,

The PCE WG minutes are posted -
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-104-pce/

Thanks Hari for taking the notes.

If you have any corrections, please reach out to pce-cha...@ietf.org.

Thanks!
Dhruv

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

[Pce] New PCE Secretary

[julien.meuric]

Dear PCE WG,

With Dhruv becoming a co-chair of the WG, we had an empty secretary position. 
The call for volunteers was successful and we appreciate the interest expressed 
for the WG. Among these, the chairs have decided to appoint Hariharan 
Ananthakrishnan from Netflix as a secretary of the PCE WG. Those of you who 
were on Etherpad during the Prague session may have noticed he was already 
taking care of the minutes.

Please welcome Hari to this position!

Cheers,

Adrian, Dhruv & Julien


_

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Reminder: Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Ricard Vilalta]

Hi Adrian,

Sorry for being late.

This draft has been useful when implementing ACTN framework in some 
demonstrations. I think that this draft should go to the next level.


BR,

Ricard

On 01/04/2019 9:34, Adrian Farrel wrote:

So far you have all been very quiet.

Thanks,
Adrian

-Original Message-
From: Pce  On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: 13 March 2019 22:01
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

Hi working group,

This email starts a working group last call for
draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.

I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.

If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us
know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the
work is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome -
although this document is informational, I believe some people may have
built stateful hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.

If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate
them.

As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.

Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and because
of the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on
April 4th.

Thanks,
Adrian

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce


___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Satish K]

Hi WG,

We have implemented H-PCE in our ACTN Solution and implemented few features
of it in IETF-97 Hackathon.
Also the E2E solution of ACTN using H-PCE is showcased during Bits-n-Bytes
as well.

So i am very much interested and looking forward to see this draft is
getting published.

Thanks & Regards,
Satish Karunanithi

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 3:31 AM Adrian Farrel  wrote:

> Hi working group,
>
> This email starts a working group last call for
> draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.
>
> I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.
>
> If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us
> know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the
> work is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome -
> although this document is informational, I believe some people may have
> built stateful hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.
>
> If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate
> them.
>
> As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.
>
> Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and
> because
> of the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on
> April 4th.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
> ___
> Pce mailing list
> Pce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
>
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Reminder: Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Daniele Ceccarelli]

Same here...and I couldn’t explain it better than Ramon.

 

BR

 

Daniele  

 

From: Pce  On Behalf Of Ramon Casellas
Sent: den 1 april 2019 09:46
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] Reminder: Working Group last call on 
draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

 

Hi all

Apologies for the delay in my response. 

I have read the draft, and I support its progression. In the framework of 
several research projects, we have been considering, implementing and testing 
stateful hierarchical PCE for optical networks and this draft describes the 
general considerations for the applicability of stateful HPCE in a multi-domain 
network. 

I also think it is a good companion document to the work on ACTN being done in 
the TEAS WG

Best regards

Ramon

 

On 01/04/2019 9:34, Adrian Farrel wrote:

So far you have all been very quiet.
 
Thanks,
Adrian
 
-Original Message-
From: Pce    On Behalf Of 
Adrian Farrel
Sent: 13 March 2019 22:01
To: pce@ietf.org  
Subject: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06
 
Hi working group,
 
This email starts a working group last call for
draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.
 
I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.
 
If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us
know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the
work is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome -
although this document is informational, I believe some people may have
built stateful hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.
 
If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate
them.
 
As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.
 
Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and because
of the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on
April 4th.
 
Thanks,
Adrian
 
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org  
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
 
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org  
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

-- 
Ramon Casellas, Ph.D. -- Senior Research Associate -- Networks Division
Optical Networks and Systems Department -- http://networks.cttc.es/ons
CTTC - Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya
Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia (PMT) - Edifici B4
Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss, 7 - 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona) - Spain
Tel.: +34 93 645 29 00 ext 2168-- Fax. +34 93 645 29 01


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Reminder: Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Ramon Casellas]

Hi all

Apologies for the delay in my response.

I have read the draft, and I support its progression. In the framework 
of several research projects, we have been considering, implementing and 
testing stateful hierarchical PCE for optical networks and this draft 
describes the general considerations for the applicability of stateful 
HPCE in a multi-domain network.


I also think it is a good companion document to the work on ACTN being 
done in the TEAS WG


Best regards

Ramon


On 01/04/2019 9:34, Adrian Farrel wrote:

So far you have all been very quiet.

Thanks,
Adrian

-Original Message-
From: Pce  On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: 13 March 2019 22:01
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

Hi working group,

This email starts a working group last call for
draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.

I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.

If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us
know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the
work is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome -
although this document is informational, I believe some people may have
built stateful hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.

If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate
them.

As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.

Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and because
of the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on
April 4th.

Thanks,
Adrian

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce


--
Ramon Casellas, Ph.D. -- Senior Research Associate -- Networks Division
Optical Networks and Systems Department -- http://networks.cttc.es/ons
CTTC - Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya
Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia (PMT) - Edifici B4
Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss, 7 - 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona) - Spain
Tel.: +34 93 645 29 00 ext 2168-- Fax. +34 93 645 29 01

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

[Pce] 答复: Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept)]

Hi, WG, 

I have read this document and believe this work is very useful. Stateful H-PCE 
will enable a more efficient way to do the computation with a group of PCEs. 
The document is in a good shape as well. 

I support to move forward on this document, some minor comments are provided to 
be fixed after the LC: 
- The page number in ToC is not consistent, maybe an update on word would be 
needed; 
- PCEP stateful extension in RFC8231, and PCEP initiation extension in RFC8281, 
are usually considered as two separate works. Given the fact we have merged the 
gmpls extension with two features, it is reasonable to have these two features 
in the h-pce work as well. I noticed there is corresponding descriptions in 
section 3.3, and I think it would be useful if one sentence can be summarized 
in the abstract. 

OLD: 
   A Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) maintains information on
   the current network state, including: computed Label Switched Path
   (LSPs), reserved resources within the network, and pending path
   computation requests. This information may then be considered when
   computing new traffic engineered LSPs, and for associated
   and dependent LSPs, received from Path Computation Clients (PCCs).
NEW:
   A Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) maintains information on
   the current network state, including: computed Label Switched Path
   (LSPs), reserved resources within the network, and pending path
   computation requests. This information may then be considered when
   computing new traffic engineered LSPs, and for associated
   and dependent LSPs, received from Path Computation Clients (PCCs). 
   Initialize the result of path computation from PCE is also helpful for 
   the PCC to gracefully establish the computed LSP. 

- As mentioned in IETF 104 PCE WG session (draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors), 
error handling issues need to be mentioned for inter-pce works, and this work 
exactly fits into the scope. It is suggested to add one small section about 
this. How about the following? 

7.7.  Error Handling between PCEs
Error types specified in PCEP should be properly propagate between parent and 
child PCEs. The propagation, notification and criticality level defined in 
[I-D. ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] are recommended. 

- The idnits report an unused reference 'pcep-yang', probably because of the 
line in section 7.2 for citation is not properly broken in the middle. Editing 
will be helpful to fix it. 

We are looking forward to see the improvement after the WG LC, thank you. 

Best wishes,
Haomian

-邮件原件-
发件人: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Adrian Farrel
发送时间: 2019年3月14日 6:01
收件人: pce@ietf.org
主题: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

Hi working group,

This email starts a working group last call for draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.

I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.

If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us 
know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the work 
is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome - although 
this document is informational, I believe some people may have built stateful 
hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.

If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate them.

As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.

Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and because of 
the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on April 
4th.

Thanks,
Adrian

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

[Pce] Reminder: Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Adrian Farrel]

So far you have all been very quiet.

Thanks,
Adrian

-Original Message-
From: Pce  On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: 13 March 2019 22:01
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

Hi working group,

This email starts a working group last call for
draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.

I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.

If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us
know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the
work is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome -
although this document is informational, I believe some people may have
built stateful hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.

If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate
them.

As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.

Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and because
of the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on
April 4th.

Thanks,
Adrian

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

[Biz Total Solution Projec]

Dear wg members,

We, kt, support the progression of 'draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06'.
In a large and multi-domain network environment, it is essentially important 
for network provider to have an hierarchical pce capability.
So, we think this document is valuable to be published as an RFC.

Thank you,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 5:01 PM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Working Group last call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06

Hi working group,

This email starts a working group last call for draft-ietf-pce-stateful-hpce-06.

I would like to hear messages of support or concern about this draft.

If you support its progression towards publication as an RFC, please let us 
know that you have read the latest revision, and explain why you think the work 
is important. Indications of implementation would also be welcome - although 
this document is informational, I believe some people may have built stateful 
hierarchical PCEs for experimentation or deployment.

If you are opposed to the progression or have concerns please articulate them.

As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.

Because of the effort that is going in to preparing for IETF-104 and because of 
the time spent away, this last call will run for three weeks and end on April 
4th.

Thanks,
Adrian

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce


이 메일은 지정된 수취인만을 위해 작성되었으며, 중요한 정보나 저작권을 포함하고 있을 수 있습니다. 어떠한 권한 없이, 본 문서에 포함된 
정보의 전부 또는 일부를 무단으로 제3자에게 공개, 배포, 복사 또는 사용하는 것을 엄격히 금지합니다. 만약, 본 메일이 잘못 전송된 경우, 
발신인 또는 당사에 알려주시고, 본 메일을 즉시 삭제하여 주시기 바랍니다.
This E-mail may contain confidential information and/or copyright material. 
This email is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you receive this 
email by mistake, please either delete it without reproducing, distributing or 
retaining copies thereof or notify the sender immediately.
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce