Feedback on draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Feedback on draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors

Dhruv Dhody
Hi WG,

The WG I-D draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors enhances the error and notification handling in PCEP. It is one of the older I-Ds that has changed editorship multiple times.

We do not see the enhanced mechanism specified in this I-D being utilized by any other document yet. We would like to understand if there is still interest in publishing this as an RFC. Could you also state your reasoning? Please provide your feedback by Monday, 17th May.

Thanks!
PCE Chairs

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feedback on draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors

Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept)

Hi, WG,

 

I have been working on this document for a few iterations. Generally speaking I think this is not a typical PCEP work, because it is not focusing providing path computation characteristics, but some communication mechanisms among PCEs. It won’t be applicable for single PCE scenario. The TLVs extended in this document, propagation TLV and criticality TLV, are used to describe the rule for a single PCE when handling the error.

 

My personal opinion is, this work will be useful when multiple PCEs (especially from different vendors) need to negotiate how to do the error handling, for example in inter-layer or H-PCE cases. With more and more PCE developed and deployed in the network, the mechanism defined in this document will eventually be needed, but it may take some time.

 

Thank you.

 

Best wishes,

Haomian (editor)

 

发件人: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:[hidden email]]
发送时间: 202154 1:39
收件人: [hidden email]
抄送: [hidden email]
主题: Feedback on draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors

 

Hi WG,

The WG I-D draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors enhances the error and notification handling in PCEP. It is one of the older I-Ds that has changed editorship multiple times.

We do not see the enhanced mechanism specified in this I-D being utilized by any other document yet. We would like to understand if there is still interest in publishing this as an RFC. Could you also state your reasoning? Please provide your feedback by Monday, 17th May.

Thanks!
PCE Chairs


_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce