The IESG has received a request from the Path Computation Element WG (pce) to
consider the following document: - 'Conveying path setup type in PCEP
messages'
as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send su
Jeff, I definitely agree with you about kitchen sinks.
OTOH, in this case the lack of coordination is actually painful and creates a
mess since each vendor uses a different way to instruct its devices after a
PCinitiate has completed successfully.
A Deployment Considerations section sounds just
I’d “carefully” support the adoption, while functionality is needed, and having
complete set in a single protocol has its advantages (and complexity
associated), we already have one “kitchen sink” protocol, that has however been
designed to support 100M of entries and deal with bursty data, PCEP
Unsurprisingly, I also think we should adopt this drafts.
To me it seems like a critical piece of function that we "forgot" when we
started to allow thee PCE to have control.
AFAIK current implementations "bodge" around the issue backing up PCEP messages
with other control messages (such as Netconf
Hi,
Yes/support.
Thanks,
Young
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 7:34 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
Dear PCE
Yes/Support.
Best Regards,
Huaimo
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 8:34 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
Dear PC
Yes/support
BR
Daniele
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
Sent: martedì 20 febbraio 2018 14:48
To: Jonathan Hardwick
Cc: pce@ietf.org; draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
Yes
Yes/Support!
Regards,
Dhruv (co-author)
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Jonathan Hardwick <
jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com> wrote:
> Dear PCE WG
>
>
>
> This is the start of a two week poll on making
> draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a PCE working group document.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.or
Hi Adrian
Thanks for the suggestion and for the gentle reminder. I have just polled for
adoption of this draft. Given this, it does not sound like you will need this
slot, after all. Of course, if the poll throws up issues that must be
discussed, or something else turns up, please feel free
Dear PCE WG
This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/
Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating "yes/support"
or "no/do not support". If indicati
10 matches
Mail list logo
