Re: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt

"Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com> Fri, 09 August 2013 21:00 UTC

Return-Path: <mhartley@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F5421F9476 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 14:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JsfULEPFF4s1 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 14:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B91C21F9C9B for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 13:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1605; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1376081591; x=1377291191; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=I7AxwgjeWTyLA2LoUVvgRqrtaHutSJfQ/bfYaIYoHpE=; b=YZ5rbOUu8k5Ft4pRFT51otqcnESTT3kbs55zQldf1FpAm8O0L4IgRvDs hAUILQsEYz65JtNmaZgtviEzcUISVFDhDjQ10/8oZGjlrHAHY1g34yCSn 4e9J9+TrfIiXee65BAL/+OrdJ9Y+3ZxHCpJ2iJ+Tvl9RsBlZf5mk2xVt5 o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgcFAJhVBVKtJV2b/2dsb2JhbABbgwY1UL5XgRwWdIIkAQEBAwEBAQE3NAsFBwQCAQgRBAEBCxQJBycLFAkIAQEEAQ0FCIgCBgy4WwSQATEHBoMUdQOpMYMbgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,848,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="245624074"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Aug 2013 20:53:10 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com [173.37.183.81]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r79KrA8O001575 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 9 Aug 2013 20:53:10 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.7.202]) by xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com ([173.37.183.81]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 15:53:10 -0500
From: "Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com>
To: Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>, John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>, "CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt
Thread-Index: Ac6UXh3OMYPEaNUmSzSE7m3SYlvx7wARnPhAACdi0mA=
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 20:53:09 +0000
Message-ID: <9D50FCE7413E3D4EA5E42331115FB5BC105AF32C@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com>
References: <6a054c6778634c0f9d84db0f09b9dfda@BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF84EE47162@SZXEML552-MBX.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF84EE47162@SZXEML552-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [161.44.212.251]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 21:00:21 -0000

Fatai, John,

I don't think you can guarantee that PCE will be deployed absolutely everywhere, or that you can guarantee the client will be permitted access to the server PCE when it is. In those cases, this draft is useful.

Cheers

Matt

> Hi John,
> 
> Completely agree.
> 
> I also raised this comment in front of the mic during Berlin meeting.
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> Fatai
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> John E Drake
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 1:49 AM
> To: CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
> Subject: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have a real concern with this draft because it appears to be heading us
> down the road of re-inventing PCEP in RSVP signaling with the dubious
> justification that it is needed in those situations in which a PCE is not
> available.  However, if you re-invent PCEP in RSVP signaling, then you have
> effectively ensured that there are no situations in which a PCE or its
> signaling equivalent are not available.
> 
> Why is this better than simply ensuring that a PCE is available in those
> situations in which it is needed?
> 
> Yours Irrespectively,
> 
> John
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp