Re: [CCAMP] Poll on making draft-farrel-interconnected-te-info-exchange-07 a WG document

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Thu, 20 November 2014 15:34 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAA101A1A65 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 07:34:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iau6DQUSt3wo for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 07:33:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A92311A1A6B for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 07:33:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sAKFXrMU029351; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:33:53 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sAKFXq7f029331 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:33:53 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Dhruv Dhody'" <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>, <ccamp@ietf.org>
References: <54490A2A.1080200@labn.net> <CAB75xn6FTZBnM0neLvdhA0xfmNKzKNvEN8QzYZFbVMejEyZRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB75xn6FTZBnM0neLvdhA0xfmNKzKNvEN8QzYZFbVMejEyZRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:33:51 -0000
Message-ID: <014801d004d7$634a5540$29deffc0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQEKhfq5T2pTR8YeB9FdpIQ99zzFdQJOlr50neIrIrA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-21118.000
X-TM-AS-Result: No--15.596-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--15.596-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: scwq2vQP8OHixMfCuUph2fHkpkyUphL9CAruoteJOhxtlN384bJI28wm jQloGI08JFdcwKgrTDJSL4ES3quteJRMdwEiWk2NJPtoDd9SoCZCs7hdHoFFA6Cet5JcMwt135d D76rzBff1fLo/wsLUPu3O1c45hX7gshuW/E9fUIRNI82n17+7U2EF8bGZ0cKCut/GVGOoEndpb1 I2JvNYnKNWtjQBPqki+6bI4L940xxb0NpcaFEl4J4CIKY/Hg3AWQy9YC5qGvxg7YIUxTWw1yq2r l3dzGQ1haExboHZU4DnH0hR/2GT5nV3hG6sO8jLEtm8Hctm5mpuWAxiTvjRyA==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/fWHbtDNj0HFeQX-VC0FTz7S0KqU
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Poll on making draft-farrel-interconnected-te-info-exchange-07 a WG document
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:34:08 -0000

Hi Dhruv,

Finally turning to this now that the I-D is adopted.

> - Shouldnt the draft be on informational track?

For the chairs / WG to direct.

> - In section 4.3 about PCE, some text about inter-layer PCE [RFC5623]
> should also be added.

Yeah. Adding a few words.

> - In section 6, Building on Existing Protocols, could PCEP also play a
> role? The server PCE can provide abstract TE information to the
> abstraction layer PCE using the recent work in [1] and [2] in the
> deployments where PCEs are used. Guilty for shameless self-promotion
> :)

I'm going to mutter about this.
IMHO any protocol can be used to do anything. It's just data in messages.
However, IMNSHO, this is not what PCEP is for and is not a good extension of the protocol. I rant about this from time to time [3] and I will continue to rant. However, if the WG believes that it is right to use PCEP to move email or furniture then I'll gladly update the document.

> - update reference to farrkingel-pce-questions

Yup.

> Thanks!
> Dhruv
> 
> [1]http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lee-pce-transporting-te-data/
> [2]http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhodylee-pce-pcep-te-data-extn/

[3] http://www.olddog.co.uk/PCEPandOnwards.ppt

Adrian