I support adoption of this draft (as co-author). The binding label provides a mechanism for interworking between separate MPLS switching domains, which is an important consideration as SR is rolled out. Extending PCEP with this capability is a logical and necessary step.
Cheers Jon -----Original Message----- From: Pce <pce-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody Sent: 20 August 2019 18:45 To: pce@ietf.org Cc: pce-chairs <pce-cha...@ietf.org> Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-sivabalan-pce-binding-label-sid-07 NOTE: Message is from an external sender Hi WG, This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-sivabalan-pce-binding-label-sid-07 [1]. Should this draft be adopted by the PCE WG? Please state your reasons - Why / Why not? What needs to be fixed before or after adoption? Are you willing to work on this draft? Review comments should be posted to the list. One of the chairs did a pre-adoption review [2] and authors posted a new revision. Note that there are known implementations. This adoption poll will end on 6th September 2019. Thanks! Dhruv (for the chairs) [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sivabalan-pce-binding-label-sid-07 [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/oaBIRA9FnNsV6-JrKKRCdwtLysk _______________________________________________ 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
