Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[julien.meuric]

Hi all,

It is time to close this poll. We have a consensus to put this document
into the hands of the PCE WG.

Authors, please submit the same I-D as
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-00.

Thanks,

Dhruv & Julien


On 26/11/2020 16:34, julien.meu...@orange.com wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share
> your thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
> Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please
> use the PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or
> disagreement, including applicable rationale, especially for the latter.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dhruv & Julien
>



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)]

Hi WG, 

This draft has been updated and aligned with other relevant drafts, and an 
editorial cleanup was made. I support the WG adoption as a coauthor. 

Thank you! 

Best regards, 
Shuping 



> -Original Message-
> From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> julien.meu...@orange.com
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2020 11:35 PM
> To: pce@ietf.org
> Subject: [Pce] Adoption of
> draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share your
> thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
> Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please use
> the PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or disagreement,
> including applicable rationale, especially for the latter.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dhruv & Julien
> 

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

Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Gyan Mishra]

I support WG adoption of this critical draft extension to support Segment
Routing SR-MPLS path instantiation via SID allocation and distribution by a
PCECC  centralized  SDN controller.

This document is well written and ready for WG adoption.

Thanks

Gyan

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 8:11 AM Mahend Negi  wrote:

> Hi WG,
>
>
> This draft is a useful extension which enables PCECC to leverage Segment 
> Routing.
>
> The draft clearly defines the requirements and the detailed procedures for 
> supporting Segment Routing by a PCECC.
>
>
> I support the WG adoption.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mahendra
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:05 PM  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share
>> your thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
>> Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please
>> use the PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or
>> disagreement, including applicable rationale, especially for the latter.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dhruv & Julien
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
-- 



*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *



*M 301 502-134713101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Mahend Negi]

Hi WG,


This draft is a useful extension which enables PCECC to leverage
Segment Routing.

The draft clearly defines the requirements and the detailed procedures
for supporting Segment Routing by a PCECC.


I support the WG adoption.


Thanks,

Mahendra


On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:05 PM  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share
> your thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
> Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please
> use the PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or
> disagreement, including applicable rationale, especially for the latter.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dhruv & Julien
>
>
> ___
> 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] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)]

Hi Adrian,

Thank you for your comments.

We plan to discuss the PCEP-LS in the next meeting in a hope to make some 
progress on it. We can always move the TLV in question to this I-D from PCEP-LS 
if need be.

RFC5511 will be added.

Thank you!

Best regards,
Shuping


--
彭书萍 Peng Shuping
Mobile: +86-18210364128(优先)
Email: pengshup...@huawei.com<mailto:pengshup...@huawei.com>
发件人：Adrian Farrel 
收件人：julien.meuric ;pce 
时 间：2020-12-03 21:05:30
主 题：Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

Hello all,

I was a contributor to some of the earlier versions of this document and am 
listed as such (although I don't think I work for Juniper any more).

I think the document is in a good enough state for adoption.

Post-adoption there are some things that could benefit from work...

- I worry about having draft-dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls referenced by section 5.4
  This use is normative, but draft-dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls is only included as an
  informative reference. It is worrying because it is unclear at this stage 
whether
  the WG will choose to adopt that work.
- The document feels too long for a relatively small extension. However, a
  quick scan doesn't immediately identify sections to prune.
- A reference to RFC 5511 is needed to explain section 6.1

Best,
Adrian

-Original Message-
From: Pce < pce-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of 
julien.meu...@orange.com<mailto:julien.meu...@orange.com>
Sent: 26 November 2020 15:35
To: pce@ietf.org<mailto:pce@ietf.org>
Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

Hi all,

PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share
your thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please
use the PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or
disagreement, including applicable rationale, especially for the latter.

Thanks,

Dhruv & Julien



___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org<mailto: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] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Adrian Farrel]

Hello all,

I was a contributor to some of the earlier versions of this document and am 
listed as such (although I don't think I work for Juniper any more).

I think the document is in a good enough state for adoption.

Post-adoption there are some things that could benefit from work...

- I worry about having draft-dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls referenced by section 5.4
  This use is normative, but draft-dhodylee-pce-pcep-ls is only included as an
  informative reference. It is worrying because it is unclear at this stage 
whether
  the WG will choose to adopt that work.
- The document feels too long for a relatively small extension. However, a
  quick scan doesn't immediately identify sections to prune.
- A reference to RFC 5511 is needed to explain section 6.1

Best,
Adrian

-Original Message-
From: Pce  On Behalf Of julien.meu...@orange.com
Sent: 26 November 2020 15:35
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

Hi all,

PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share
your thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please
use the PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or
disagreement, including applicable rationale, especially for the latter.

Thanks,

Dhruv & Julien



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

Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Chao Zhou]

 Hi there,
I believe this is a useful extension for both PCECC and SR. I support to adopt 
this as PCE WG item.
Thanks,-Chao
-Original Message-
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of julien.meu...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2020 11:35 PM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

Hi all,

PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share your 
thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please use the 
PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or disagreement, including 
applicable rationale, especially for the latter.

Thanks,

Dhruv & Julien


___
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] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[wangyali]

Hi WG,

This draft extends the base PCECC for supporting configuration of the 
forwarding actions on the routers and SR SID allocation, which I believe it is 
useful.

I support the WG adoption of this draft.

Best,
Yali

-Original Message-
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of julien.meu...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2020 11:35 PM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

Hi all,

PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share your 
thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please use the 
PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or disagreement, including 
applicable rationale, especially for the latter.

Thanks,

Dhruv & Julien


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

Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

[Chengli (Cheng Li)]

Hi PCE,

This document  specifies the SR-MPLS extensions based on PCECC base draft,  and 
also a long document. Many thanks for authors.

I think making PCE as a center controller is useful in SR-MPLS scenarios, and 
CCI object is a good idea. Therefore I support the adoption.

Thanks,
Cheng




-Original Message-
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of julien.meu...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2020 11:35 PM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09?

Hi all,

PCECC extensions are progressing towards the IESG. It is time to share your 
thoughts about draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-09.
Do you believe the I-D is a right foundation for a PCE WG item? Please use the 
PCE mailing list to express your comments, support or disagreement, including 
applicable rationale, especially for the latter.

Thanks,

Dhruv & Julien


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