Hi Julien, PCE WG
New version -07[1] has been posted to address the review feedback. Thanks once
again for the review and Shepherding this.
>>>"Any reason why the case above doesn't include the legacy situation,
>>>similarly to the case below (i.e. "but MAY consider protection eligibility
>>>as a PROTECTION MANDATORY constraint")?"
Good question. At the time of the original text the core intention was to clear
up interop behavior differences when L=1, in addition to introducing the E flag
as the strictness toggle, as that was key impacting interop problem. In other
words, the E=1 specifically was to influence the behavior when L=1 or when L=0,
and introduce strong enforcement when E=1. When L=0, E=0, the significance on
interop and implementation isn't as impacting. If we allow backwards
compatibility of L=1, E=0, by permitting "protection mandatory", that would
continue to result in different interop implementations of (L=1) which is
something the core of the document wanted to correct. The text on L=0, E=0 is
trying to play nice with existing known implementations, since the impact in
that scenario (the resulting path calculation) wasn't significant. Essentially
it's a flag combination which is considered okay to provide backwards interop
for in the text.
Thanks
Andrew
[1]
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-local-protection-enforcement-07.txt
On 2022-08-04, 6:06 AM, "Pce on behalf of julien.meu...@orange.com"
wrote:
Hi authors of draft-ietf-pce-local-protection-enforcement,
I'm the shepherd of the aforementioned document. The problem statement
is well described and the solution defined is clear. The I-D is almost
ready to progress but has minor issues that need to be addressed before
sending to the IESG.
_From idnits:_
- The abstract should avoid using references, i.e. you may replace
"[RFC5440]" by a phrase like "the base specification".
- RFC 4655 is used as a normative document, though not mandatory to
implement the I-D: moving it into informative reference section would
not only reflect this, but would also avoid the downref.
_From my reading:_
- The page header just mentions "I-D": a short title is expected there.
- Even if "PCEP" has become a name for the protocol, which leads to
dropping "a"/"the", the acronym "PCE" is usually used as a shortcut for
the full phrase, thus one expects to see it prefixed by "a"/"the" (cf.
"BGP" vs. "the IGP"). I've caught several of these below but probably
missed some.
- Abstract
OLD:
This document updates [RFC5440] to clarify usage of the local
protection desired bit signalled in Path Computation Element
Protocol
(PCEP).
NEW:
This document extends the base specification to clarify the
usage of the
local protection desired bit signalled in the Path Computation
Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP).
- Introduction
s/Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)/The Path
Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)/
s/Path Control Element/Path Computation Element/ [or just the acronym,
since already expanded in the 1st line]
NEW:
this flag signals to downstream routers that local protection
is desired, which indicates to transit routers that they may use a
local repair mechanism.
OLD:
this flag signals to downstream routers that they may use a
local repair mechanism.
s/it's calculation/its calculation/
s/advertised into IGP/advertised into the IGP/
s/and for a given adjacency between two routers there may be/and, for a
given adjacency between two routers, there may be/
s/calculated by PCE/calculated by a PCE/
s/discovered by PCE/discovered by the PCE/
- Section 3
s/...: path/...: The Path/ [x4]
- Section 4
s/example,UNPROTECTED/example, UNPROTECTED/
s/by PCE/by the PCE/
s/for PCE/for the PCE/
s/traffic engineered secondary path/traffic-engineered secondary path/
s/to instruction PCE/to instruct the PCE/
- Section 5
s/When set/When set to 1/
s/When not set/When set to 0/
s/which PCE/which the PCE/
s/When set/When set to 1/
s/by PCE/by the PCE/
s/When E flag is not set/When the E flag is set to 0/
s/however PCE/however the PCE/
s/ignore L flag/ignore the L flag/
s/when E flag is unset/when the E flag is set to 0/
s/When L flag is set and E flag is set then PCE/When both the L flag and
the E flag are set to 1, then the PCE/
s/as PROTECTION MANDATORY constraint/as a PROTECTION MANDATORY constraint/
s/When L flag is set and E flag is not set then PCE/When the L flag is
set to 1 and the E flag is set to 0, then the PCE/
s/as PROTECTION PREFERRED constraint/as a PROTECTION PREFERRED constraint/
