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

John,
	So how does a PCE *in the server layer* learn about the service
parameters desired by for an LSP, e.g., desired LSP latency, signaled
across a UNI?

Now certainly a PCE server in the client layer is a different matter.

BTW I'm not advocating any particular draft or solution in this message,
I'm just trying to understand your model. I do agree that it's always
best to understand what is needed/missing before jumping into
discussions on solution details.

Lou

On 08/09/2013 05:22 PM, John E Drake wrote:
> PCEP can be deployed whenever the server network wishes to provide a path computation service.  What possible advantage to anyone is gained by embedding PCEP in RSVP-TE signaling? 
> 
> Yours Irrespectively,
> 
> John
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Matt Hartley (mhartley) [mailto:mhartley@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 1:53 PM
>> To: Fatai Zhang; John E Drake; CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
>> Cc: Matt Hartley (mhartley)
>> Subject: RE: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-
>> 03.txt
>>
>> 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
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> 