[Pce] WG Action: Rechartered Path Computation Element (pce)
The Path Computation Element (pce) WG in the Routing Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. Path Computation Element (pce) --- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Julien Meuric Dhruv Dhody Secretaries: Andrew Stone Assigned Area Director: John Scudder Routing Area Directors: John Scudder Jim Guichard Andrew Alston Mailing list: Address: pce@ietf.org To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/ Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/pce/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-pce/ The PCE Working Group is chartered to specify the required protocols to enable a Path Computation Element (PCE)-based architecture for the computation of paths for MPLS and GMPLS Point to Point and Point to Multi-point traffic-engineered LSPs, as well as new path setup types of Segment Routing (SR), BIER, and Detnet. In this architecture path computation does not necessarily occur on the head-end (ingress) node, but on some other path computation entity that may not be physically located on each head-end node. The TEAS Working Group is responsible for defining and extending architectures for Traffic Engineering (TE) and it is expected that the PCE and TEAS WGs will work closely together on elements of TE architectures that utilize PCE. The PCE WG works on the application of this model within a single domain or within a group of domains (where a domain is a layer, IGP area, or Autonomous System with limited visibility from the head-end LSR). At this time, applying this model to large groups of domains such as the Internet is not thought to be possible, and the PCE WG will not spend energy on that topic. The WG specifies the PCE communication Protocol (PCEP) and needed extensions for communication between Path Computation Clients (PCCs) and PCEs, and between cooperating PCEs. Security mechanisms such as authentication and confidentiality are included. The WG works on the mechanisms for inter-domain as well as multi-layer path computation and PCEP extensions for communication between several domains or network layers. The WG defines the required PCEP extensions for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON) and Flexible Grid while keeping consistency with the GMPLS protocols specified in the CCAMP and TEAS WGs. Work Items: - PCEP extensions to support MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineered LSP path computation models involving PCEs. This includes the case of computing the paths of intra- and inter-domain TE LSPs. Such path computation includes the generation of primary, protection, and recovery paths, as well as computations for (local/global) reoptimization and load balancing. Both intra- and inter-domain applications are covered. - In cooperation with the TEAS Working Group, development of PCE- based architectures for Traffic Engineering including PCE as a Central Controller (PCECC) and Centralized Control Dynamic Routing (CCDR). The PCEP extensions are developed in the PCE Working Group. - In cooperation with protocol-specific Working Groups (e.g., MPLS, CCAMP), development of LSP signaling (RSVP-TE) extensions required to support PCE-based path computation models. - Specification of PCEP extensions for expressing path computation requests and responses in the various GMPLS-controlled networks, including WSON and Flexible Grid. - Specification of PCEP extensions for path computation in multi-layer and inter-domain networks. - Specification of the PCEP extensions used by a stateful PCE for recommending a new path for an existing or new LSP to the PCC/PCE. Further protocol extensions must cover the case where the receiving PCC/PCE chooses not to follow the recommendation. The PCEP extensions for state synchronization are also in scope. - Specification of the PCEP extensions for SR-MPLS and SRv6 paths as per the SR Policy architecture in cooperation with SPRING Working Group. - Specification of the PCEP extensions for new path setup types (such as BIER and DETNET) in cooperation with the respective Working Groups. Milestones: Nov 2023 - Submit PCEP YANG Model as a Proposed Standard Nov 2023 - Submit PCEP Native-IP extensions as a Proposed Standard Mar 2024 - Submit PCEP extensions for SR Policy as Proposed Standard Mar 2024 - Submit PCEP extensions for Multipath as Proposed Standard Dec 2024 - Submit Enhancements to Stateful PCE Mar 2025 - Evaluate WG progress, recharter or close ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
Re: [Pce] AD review of draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-02
John, Now that the I-D has been placed on the 1/4 telechat should I spin a new version that incorporates the outstanding PRs: https://github.com/ietf-wg-pce/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/pulls spt > On Dec 5, 2023, at 12:03, John Scudder wrote: > > Hi Authors, > > Thanks for this document. Looks good, I've requested IETF last call. > > A couple of notes below, they didn't seem worth holding up the last call for, > but please consider them for your next revision. > > - "what PCEPS implementations do if a PCEPS supports more than one version". > I don't think PCEPS (second occurrence) takes an article (i.e. referring to > "a PCEPS" is weird). Some rewrite seems called for, perhaps s/a PCEPS/one/. > > - "neither the PCC nor the PCE should establish a PCEPS with > TLS connection with an unknown, unexpected, or incorrectly identified > peer;" > > Isn't "PCEPS with TLS" redundant, doesn't the ess in PCEPS imply TLS? In > which case, just drop "with TLS". (See also, "ATM machine" :-) > > Thanks, > > —John ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
Re: [Pce] AD review of draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-02
Please and thank you. —John > On Dec 19, 2023, at 8:41 PM, Sean Turner wrote: > > [External Email. Be cautious of content] > > > John, > > Now that the I-D has been placed on the 1/4 telechat should I spin a new > version that incorporates the outstanding PRs: > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/ietf-wg-pce/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/pulls__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!C1CkLmJEflB_yG5NzS23pvZunYM61_KOufCqnD3aLWVaJZDL5UwvsYUQm373Q10IaWGT6mz5MA$ > > spt > >> On Dec 5, 2023, at 12:03, John Scudder wrote: >> >> Hi Authors, >> >> Thanks for this document. Looks good, I've requested IETF last call. >> >> A couple of notes below, they didn't seem worth holding up the last call >> for, but please consider them for your next revision. >> >> - "what PCEPS implementations do if a PCEPS supports more than one version". >> I don't think PCEPS (second occurrence) takes an article (i.e. referring to >> "a PCEPS" is weird). Some rewrite seems called for, perhaps s/a PCEPS/one/. >> >> - "neither the PCC nor the PCE should establish a PCEPS with >> TLS connection with an unknown, unexpected, or incorrectly identified >> peer;" >> >> Isn't "PCEPS with TLS" redundant, doesn't the ess in PCEPS imply TLS? In >> which case, just drop "with TLS". (See also, "ATM machine" :-) >> >> Thanks, >> >> —John > ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
[Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.txt
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Path Computation Element (PCE) WG of the IETF. Title: Updates for PCEPS: TLS Connection Establishment Restrictions Authors: Dhruv Dhody Sean Turner Russ Housley Name:draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.txt Pages: 6 Dates: 2023-12-19 Abstract: Section 3.4 of RFC 8253 specifies TLS connection establishment restrictions for PCEPS; PCEPS refers to usage of TLS to provide a secure transport for PCEP (Path Computation Element Communication Protocol). This document adds restrictions to specify what PCEPS implementations do if they support more than one version of the TLS protocol and to restrict the use of TLS 1.3's early data. The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/ There is also an HTML version available at: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.html A diff from the previous version is available at: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03 Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at: rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.txt
Hi! This version incorporates the IETF LC comments received to date. spt > On Dec 19, 2023, at 21:31, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.txt is now available. It is a > work item of the Path Computation Element (PCE) WG of the IETF. > > Title: Updates for PCEPS: TLS Connection Establishment Restrictions > Authors: Dhruv Dhody >Sean Turner >Russ Housley > Name:draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.txt > Pages: 6 > Dates: 2023-12-19 > > Abstract: > > Section 3.4 of RFC 8253 specifies TLS connection establishment > restrictions for PCEPS; PCEPS refers to usage of TLS to provide a > secure transport for PCEP (Path Computation Element Communication > Protocol). This document adds restrictions to specify what PCEPS > implementations do if they support more than one version of the TLS > protocol and to restrict the use of TLS 1.3's early data. > > The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/ > > There is also an HTML version available at: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03.html > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at: > rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts > > ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
[Pce] New Liaison Statement, "LS on OTNT Standardization Work Plan Issue 33"
Title: LS on OTNT Standardization Work Plan Issue 33 Submission Date: 2023-12-19 URL of the IETF Web page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1891/ Please reply by 2024-06-25 From: Noriyuki ARAKI To: Fatai Zhang ,Luis Contreras ,Daniele Ceccarelli ,Dhruv Dhody ,Julien Meuric ,Andrew Stone ,Nicolai Leymann ,Tarek Saad ,Adrian Farrel ,Andy Malis ,Stewart Bryant ,Vishnu Beeram ,Lou Berger ,Oscar de Dios Cc: Scott Mansfield ,Andrew Alston ,Stewart Bryant ,Common Control and Measurement Plane Discussion List ,Fatai Zhang ,Nicolai Leymann ,Jim Guichard ,Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services Discussion List ,Path Computation Element Discussion List ,Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling Discussion List ,Dhruv Dhody ,Julien Meuric ,John Scudder ,Andy Malis ,Tarek Saad ,Vishnu Beeram ,Adrian Farrel ,Multiprotocol Label Switching Discussion List ,Daniele Ceccarelli ,itu-t-liai...@iab.org ,Lou Berger ,Deborah Brungard ,Oscar de Dios ,Luis Contreras Response Contacts: ss...@ciena.com Technical Contacts: Purpose: For action Body: Attached is Issue 33 of the OTNT SWP, the latest version updated by the SG15 during a plenary meeting in November 2023. Thank you for your replies to previous issues of these OTNT Standardization Work Plans. We would appreciate updates to the material relevant to your SDO. Attachment: Optical Transport Networks & Technologies Standardization Work Plan Issue 33, December 2023 (TD230/P) Attachments: SG15-LS89_Att_to_TD230-PLEN_OTNT_WorkPlan https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-12-19-itu-t-sg-15-mpls-ccamp-pce-pals-teas-ls-on-otnt-standardization-work-plan-issue-33-attachment-1.pdf SG15-LS89_Att_TD230-PLEN https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-12-19-itu-t-sg-15-mpls-ccamp-pce-pals-teas-ls-on-otnt-standardization-work-plan-issue-33-attachment-2.pdf SG15-LS89 https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-12-19-itu-t-sg-15-mpls-ccamp-pce-pals-teas-ls-on-otnt-standardization-work-plan-issue-33-attachment-3.pdf ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
[Pce] pce - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 119
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Dhruv Dhody, a Chair of the PCE Working Group. - Working Group Name: Path Computation Element Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Dhruv Dhody Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1.5 Hours Number of Attendees: 75 Conflicts to Avoid: Chair conflict: spring teas ccamp iabopen gendispatch Key participant conflict: alto 6man pals v6ops savnet rtgwg rtgarea rift opsawg nmrg netmod netconf mpls lsvr lsr ippm idr bier bess grow tvr cats detnet nmop ivy irtfopen hrpc genarea dispatch anrw Participants who must be present: Andrew Stone Resources Requested: Special Requests: Do not schedule against BOFs if possible. - ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
