Re: [Pce] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-yang-18

Hi Mahesh, Thanks for your 2nd review. Please find the update at - https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-pcep-yang-19 See inline... On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 4:29 AM Mahesh Jethanandani via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: Mahesh Jethanandani > Review result: On the

[Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-yang-19.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element WG of the IETF. Title : A YANG Data Model for Path Computation Element Communications Protocol (PCEP) Authors : Dhruv

Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06

Hi Tianran, thank you for your response. Your proposal to remove an MPLS network from the scope of this draft is interesting. What do the authors think of this? Regards, Greg On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 11:18 PM Tianran Zhou wrote: > Hi Greg, > > > > MNA is quite a new thing. And we cannot predict

Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06

Hi Dhruv and all, I support the adoption of the draft, I think it will be useful to extend PCEP for signaling IFIT capabilities and attributes between PCE and PCC as part of bigger IFIT framework. SR Policy is a just one use case as it was already mentioned in previous emails. SY,Boris  

[Pce] IPR Disclosure Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to RFC 9168

Dear Dhruv Dhody, Adrian Farrel, Zhenbin Li: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your RFC entitled "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension for Flow Specification" (RFC9168) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on 2022-07-11 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of

[Pce] A technical concern regarding Circuit Style Segment Routing Policies draft

Hi all, I would like to share with you what I see as a serious (and probably critical) technical issue with the Circuit Style Segment Routing Policies draft. As I see it: * One of the key objectives of this draft