Re: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller

2020-08-14 Thread Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) 
Hi Aijun,



Thank you for your comments! Please find the responses in line below.

From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Aijun Wang
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 5:42 PM
To: julien.meu...@orange.com; pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE WG LC for 
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller


Hi，Dhruv, Julien and authors of this draft:



I reviewed this draft and had the following comments for its WG LC:

1. Generally speaking, I support the direction that stated also in the draft as 
"A PCE-based central controller (PCECC) can simplify the processing of a 
distributed control plane by blending it with elements of SDN and

   without necessarily completely replacing it."





[Shuping] Thank you for your support.





2. This draft states it focuses on LSP Path central control, but I think the 
procedures described in this draft is common to other CCI object(which may be 
defined in other documents). So would it be better to generalize the 
procedures? The specific part for other path type may be only the CCI objects. 
This can facilitate the extension of PCECC procedure in other scenario.





[Shuping] Yes, you are right. We can add some text in the introduction to make 
it clear that though this document focuses on the basic PCECC LSP mode for the 
static LSPs, the procedures defined are generic enough to be used by other 
PCECC extensions.





3. Section-5.5.1of this 
draft
 describes the “Basic PCECC LSP Setup”, which is based on the LSP delegation 
mode. But for LSP delegate mode, the LSP must exist beforehand, which is 
constructed via the distributed protocol(RSVP etc.). In such scenario, is it 
necessary to allocate the Label via the PCE?





[Shuping] This is similar to the case for RFC 8664 where a PCC-initiated SR 
path is delegated to the PCE. It is not mandatory for the path (label-stack) to 
be "constructed" beforehand.





4. I think the most useful scenario for PCECC should be based on “PCE Initiate” 
message, which is used to initiate one new path from the PCE, together with the 
label allocation.





[Shuping] I agree.





5. Similar consideration is for the “PCC allocation label”. What the reason to 
let the PCC allocate such label? Why can’t PCE allocate such information for 
each PCC from its appointed label space?





[Shuping] It was suggested to be added because in some cases PCC may not be 
able to allocate a part of its label space for PCE to control and it would want 
to control the full label-space allocation.





6. For definition of CCI object, will it simplify the overall procedures if the 
CCI object for MPLS label includes both the IN and OUT label together?





[Shuping] At the ingress, we would only have out-label, and at the egress, we 
would only have an in-label.

In case of P2MP branch nodes, we would have one in-label and many out-labels as 
described in another I-D.

For these reasons, we decided to have them as separate CCI instances.





Best Regards,

Shuping

Best Regards

Aijun Wang
China Telecom








-Original Message-
From: pce-boun...@ietf.org 
[mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
julien.meu...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 12:19 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller



Hi all,



This message initiates a 3-week WG Last Call on 
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-06. Please review and share 
your feedback, whatever it is, using the PCE mailing list.

This LC will end on Wednesday August 26, 11:59pm (any timezone).



Please note that this I-D is related to

draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr which is already in our WG 
adoption queue.



Thanks,



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

Re: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller

2020-08-14 Thread duzongp...@foxmail.com 
Hi all,
 
I support the adoption.  The mechanism supports a convenient communication 
between the PCE and PCCs. 
 
Best Regards
Zongpeng Du



duzongp...@foxmail.com & duzongp...@chinamobile.com
 
From: julien.meu...@orange.com
Date: 2020-08-06 00:18
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller
Hi all,
 
This message initiates a 3-week WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-06. Please review and
share your feedback, whatever it is, using the PCE mailing list.
This LC will end on Wednesday August 26, 11:59pm (any timezone).
 
Please note that this I-D is related to
draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr which is already in our
WG adoption queue.
 
Thanks,
 
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
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller

2020-08-14 Thread Aijun Wang 
Hi，Dhruv, Julien and authors of this draft:

 

I reviewed this draft and had the following comments for its WG LC:

1. Generally speaking, I support the direction that stated also in the draft
as "A PCE-based central controller (PCECC) can simplify the processing of a
distributed control plane by blending it with elements of SDN and

   without necessarily completely replacing it."

2. This draft states it focuses on LSP Path central control, but I think the
procedures described in this draft is common to other CCI object(which may
be defined in other documents). So would it be better to generalize the
procedures? The specific part for other path type may be only the CCI
objects. This can facilitate the extension of PCECC procedure in other
scenario.

3. Section-5.5.1of this draft
  describes the “Basic PCECC LSP Setup”, which is based
on the LSP delegation mode. But for LSP delegate mode, the LSP must exist
beforehand, which is constructed via the distributed protocol(RSVP etc.). In
such scenario, is it necessary to allocate the Label via the PCE?

4. I think the most useful scenario for PCECC should be based on “PCE
Initiate” message, which is used to initiate one new path from the PCE,
together with the label allocation.

5. Similar consideration is for the “PCC allocation label”. What the
reason to let the PCC allocate such label? Why can’t PCE allocate such
information for each PCC from its appointed label space?

6. For definition of CCI object, will it simplify the overall procedures if
the CCI object for MPLS label includes both the IN and OUT label together?

 

 

Best Regards

 

Aijun Wang

China Telecom

 

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
julien.meu...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 12:19 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] PCE WG LC for
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller

 

Hi all,

 

This message initiates a 3-week WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-06. Please review and share
your feedback, whatever it is, using the PCE mailing list.

This LC will end on Wednesday August 26, 11:59pm (any timezone).

 

Please note that this I-D is related to

draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr which is already in our WG
adoption queue.

 

Thanks,

 

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

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

Re: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller

2020-08-14 Thread Peng Liu 






Support.




Regards,

Peng Liu








Peng Liu | 刘鹏

China Mobile | 移动研究院

mobile phone：13810146105

email:  liupeng...@chinamobile.com

 



发件人: julien.meuric

时间: 2020/08/06(星期四)00:18

收件人: pce;

主题: [Pce] PCE WG LC for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controllerHi all,

This message initiates a 3-week WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-06. Please review and
share your feedback, whatever it is, using the PCE mailing list.
This LC will end on Wednesday August 26, 11:59pm (any timezone).

Please note that this I-D is related to
draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr which is already in our
WG adoption queue.

Thanks,

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