Re: [CCAMP] FW: New Version Notification for draft-zhang-ccamp-route-exclusion-pathkey-01.txt

Hi Zafar,

The document follows the same procedure as RFC5553.
PKS resolution using PCE is one possible implementation, the processing
node may use other mechanism (section 3.1 of RFC5553 describes some of
them).

One possible implementation being "The LSR can use the information in the
PKS to index a CPS previously supplied to it by the PCE that originated the
PKS."

This can cover a number of mechanisms including configuration using
management system.

I hope this clarifies the statement.

Best Regards,
Cyril.

On 20 February 2014 18:29, Zafar Ali (zali) <zali@cisco.com> wrote:

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Zhangxian   (Xian)" <zhang.xian@huawei.com>
> Date: Friday, February 14, 2014 8:50 PM
> To: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>
> Subject: [CCAMP] FW: New Version Notification for
> draft-zhang-ccamp-route-exclusion-pathkey-01.txt
>
> >1: Added a section describing how the Path Key resolution works, and it
> >demonstrates that the proposed method can work in both the scenario with
> >PCE, as well as WITHOUT PCE.
> >
>
> Hi Xian:
>
> When an ERO expanding node hits exclude Path Key(EXRS), it still needs to
> lookup the path associated with the Path Key. So how do you achieve Path
> Key lookup WITHOUT PCE?
>
> More comments later,
>
> Thanks
>
> Regards...Zafar
>
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>