Hi, Dear PCErs,
We have just upload a new draft specifying the need in PCEP to allow
incremental LSP state synchronization as well as PCE control over this process
for stateful PCE(s). It also proposes PCEP extensions to support the
requirements.
Any comments/feedback are app
-
From: pce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zhangxian
(Xian)
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 2:59 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
Hi, Dear PCErs,
We have just upload a new draft specifying the
Behalf Of Zhangxian
(Xian)
Sent: 08 July 2013 10:59
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
Hi, Dear PCErs,
We have just upload a new draft specifying the need in PCEP to allow
incremental LSP state synchronization as w
requirements are
valid?
Regards,
Xian
发件人: Ina Minei [i...@juniper.net]
发送时间: 2013年7月9日 3:48
到: Zhangxian (Xian); pce@ietf.org
主题: RE: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
One minor comment for those of you who
...@tools.ietf.org
Cc: pce@ietf.org
主题: RE: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
Hi there
The incremental state synchronization mechanism looks like a potentially useful
optimization. I have a few questions for the draft authors.
The motivation of the
: Re: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
Hi, Ina,
Yes; we are aware of this and so from protocol extensions point of view,
this draft does follow the use of related flags defined there.
However, the intention of these two PCE-triggered
f.org; draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-s...@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] FW: New Version Notification for
draft-zhx-pce-stateful-lsp-sync-00.txt
Hi, Dear Jon,
Thank you very much for the useful comments. Please see our reply inline
(looking for [AUTHORS]):
_
