Re: [Pce] IPR poll on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-path-protection

I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft that should be disclosed in accordance with IETF IPR rules. Ina On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 6:50 AM Hariharan Ananthakrishnan wrote: > Hi Authors, > > Please respond ASAP if you have not already done so. The WC LC runs till > 4/30. > > - Hari > >

Re: [Pce] Final IPR Check for draft-ietf-pce-lsp-setup-type

ric [mailto:julien.meu...@orange.com] > Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 11:23 AM > To: Ina Minei <inami...@google.com>; Siva Sivabalan (msiva) < > ms...@cisco.com> > Cc: pce@ietf.org > Subject: Fwd: [Pce] Final IPR Check for draft-ietf-pce-lsp-setup-type > > Ina, Siv

Re: [Pce] draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce : clarifying the End Of Synchronization marker

Yes, ERO is always mandatory, section 6.1 clearly states that. On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Robert Varga wrote: > On 06/23/2016 03:54 PM, stephane.litkow...@orange.com wrote: > > Hi again, > > > > We also found an issue when a PCC removes a LSP. It would be good to > precise the

Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp

Adrian, Thank you for bringing this up. I will repost the initiation draft, I am aware that it expired. Before doing so, will reply to what I think is the unfinished thread ( https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/wn4gGwZnTZS53pbyg1eCHw3YMVE) , please let me know if there was a different

Re: [Pce] Chair's Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-11

Julien, Not sure where this draft stands now after the latest revisions which were posted more than a month ago. Is there anything else needed from the authors? Thank you, Ina On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Robert Varga wrote: > On 02/01/2016 02:36 PM, Julien Meuric wrote: > >

Re: [Pce] Chair's Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-11

Thanks a lot for the very useful discussions and for the continued review. Please see inline %%%, a new version of the draft will be published next week, Ina On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Julien Meuric wrote: [snip] > Two questions and one ask >> 1. Forward

Re: [Pce] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-02 and draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations-01

Support as co-author. On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 9:18 AM, julien.meu...@orange.com wrote: Dear all, As planned, this message ignites a 3-week WG Last Call on both draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-02 and draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations-01. It will end on Monday December 22 at 11:59

Re: [Pce] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app-02 and draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-09

Dhruv, thank you for sending the reference. In that case, should already be compliant since the draft defines new pcep tlvs. On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Dhruv Dhody dhruv.dh...@huawei.com wrote: Hi Ina, Snipping to the only open issue… - In sec 7.3.2. Symbolic Path Name TLV,

Re: [Pce] Adopting of draft-sivabalan-pce-segment-routing-03.txt as PCE WG Document

support On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 3:06 AM, JP Vasseur (jvasseur) jvass...@cisco.com wrote: Dear WG, We had several discussions showing a good consensus adopting draft-sivabalan-pce-segment-routing-03.txt and this work has considerably progressed in other WG. Are you in favor of adopting

Re: [Pce] Poll for Adoption of draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-03

Support as co-author. -Original Message- From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 6:14 AM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Poll for Adoption of draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-03 Hi all. Following the

Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-07.txt

of the IETF. Title : PCEP Extensions for Stateful PCE Author(s) : Edward Crabbe Jan Medved Ina Minei Robert Varga Filename: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-07.txt Pages

Re: [Pce] Implementation experience with draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp?

Ramon, Thank you again for the productive conversations and the great feedback. Posting the summary of the discussions, for the benefit of the list, please look for [ina]. Ina - Redundant ERO and ENDPOINTS in the deletion request E-C. This can be addressed with a tweak in the RBNF.

Re: [Pce] New Version Notification for draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-03.txt

for LSP deletion, to show that can send just SRP and LSP Review and comments are welcome, Ina -Original Message- From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 2:29 PM To: Robert Varga; Edward Crabbe; Ina Minei; Siva Sivabalan Subject

[Pce] Implementation experience with draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp?

This mail is a poll to the working group regarding the implementation status of the PCEP extension for PCE-initiated LSPs. If you are working on an implementation of these extensions, please share your experience and feedback with the draft authors, either on the mailing list or in private.

Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-05.txt

/the PCC MUST respond with an PCErr message/the PCC MUST respond with a PCErr message Section 7.3: s/during which time for an RSVP-signaled LSP/during which time for a RSVP-signaled LSP... 发件人: pce-boun...@ietf.org [pce-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Ina Minei [i

Re: [Pce] Comments for draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-05

Dhruv, Thank you for the careful review, please find answers inline. The comments accepted are already incorporated in what will become version 06 of the draft. Thank you, Ina [snip] ---Sec 2 Terminology: * There are lots of technical details in this section. IMO this section should just

Re: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt

One minor comment for those of you who might be reviewing this draft, please be aware that Pce-triggered sync is also covered in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-05#section-5.5.4 (though the entire database is exchanged in that case). Ina -Original Message-

Re: [Pce] Stateful PCE applicability

Cyril, Thank you for the very thoughtful comments. Please see inline ###. Ina From: Margaria, Cyril (Coriant - DE/Munich) [mailto:cyril.marga...@coriant.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 5:34 AM To: Ina Minei; JP Vasseur (jvasseur); Julien Meuric; pce@ietf.org Subject: RE: Stateful PCE

Re: [Pce] Stateful PCE applicability

To: Leeyoung Cc: Ina Minei; pce@ietf.org Subject: Re: Stateful PCE applicability We just need to be careful not to make well balanced showing the pros and cons since this cannot be seen as the magic solution to all problems. On Jun 26, 2013, at 7:17 PM, Leeyoung wrote: Hi, I support the idea

[Pce] Stateful PCE applicability

Dear chairs and working group, In light of the recent working group re-charter which now includes stateful PCE, we wanted to hear the opinions of the group on 1. the need for an applicability document for stateful PCE and 2. whether draft-zhang-pce-stateful-pce-app satisfies this

Re: [Pce] New version of the stateful pce applicability draft - draft-zhang-pce-stateful-pce-app-04

!) Adrian From: pce-boun...@ietf.orgmailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.orgmailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ina Minei Sent: 26 May 2013 22:52 To: pce@ietf.orgmailto:pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] New version of the stateful pce applicability draft - draft-zhang-pce-stateful-pce

[Pce] New version of the stateful pce applicability draft - draft-zhang-pce-stateful-pce-app-04

A new version of the stateful pce applicability draft was posted yesterday. In the interest of making progress on this document, the authors would like to solicit review, comments and discussion from the working group, before the next IETF meeting. URL:

[Pce] FW: New Version Notification for draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-01.txt

, 2013 12:21 PM To: Ina Minei Cc: e...@google.com; ms...@cisco.com; robert.va...@pantheon.sk Subject: New Version Notification for draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-01.txt A new version of I-D, draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Ina Minei and posted

Re: [Pce] IPR Disclosure: Juniper's Statement of IPR related to draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-03

on the stateful PCE work, I would like to apologize on behalf of Juniper and want to let you know that the company is taking steps to help prevent such an error from re-occurring. Ina Minei -Original Message- From: IETF Secretariat [mailto:ietf-...@ietf.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 8:55

Re: [Pce] Comments on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-02

Jon, Thank you for the detailed comments and for suggesting text offline. Posting here for the benefit of the list. The issues were discussed and resolved in a series of in-person meetings at the ietf, and comments incorporated in version 03 of the draft. Answers inline below marked ###

Re: [Pce] Comments on PCEP Extensions for Stateful PCE draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-02

Venu, Thank you for the review. Please see inline below ###. Ina From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of KONDREDDY VENUGOPAL REDDY Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 4:58 AM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Comments on PCEP Extensions for Stateful PCE

Re: [Pce] Comments on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-02

Dhruv, Thank you for the review. Please see answers inline below ###. Ina From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 8:03 AM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Comments on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-02 Hi, Please find the

Re: [Pce] 答复: stateful PCE - moving forward next steps

Oscar, Thank you for reviewing the draft. As stated in the abstract, the framework document (draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-02) covers both MPLS-TE and GMPLS. The abstract states: This document describes a set of extensions to PCEP to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS tunnels via

Re: [Pce] Comments and questions of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-00

Ramon, Thank you for the thorough review and feedback. Please find the consolidated answers from the authors inline below, look for ###. Thank you, Ina -Original Message- From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ramon Casellas Sent: Tuesday, March 27,