Hi PCE WG, Authors,I have reviewed the latest version in details and I feel
this draft is good written and I support the progression to RFC.
And I have two minor suggestions.
A，I noticed the [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] and
[I-D.ietf-pce-multipath] are in the Normative References. I am not sure if the
two drafts should be moved to Informative References when progess to RFC.
B, AS per [RFC9256] section 8.1, an SR policy is invalid when all candidate
paths are invalid and the SR policy should transit to invalid state including
removing the SR Policy and BSID and so.
Maybe it is better to consider or clarify that in the PCEP SR policy. Thanks!
Best Regards,
Quan
<<Hi WG,
<<This email starts a 2-weeks working group last call for
<<draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12.https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp/Please
indicate your support or concern for this <<<<draft. If you are opposed
<<to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If
<<you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version and
<<it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and
<<nits are most welcome.
<<The WG LC will end on Monday 22nd January 2024.
<<A general reminder to the WG to be more vocal during the last-call/adoption.
<<Thanks,
<<Dhruv & Julien
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
