IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] Adoption Poll for draft-lazzeri-pce-residual-bw

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 14 December 2018 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF77612426E for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 05:24:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 4XEcQLiiXWxW for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 05:24:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3C0B123FFD for <pce@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 05:24:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (vs3.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.124]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id wBEDOMpb021395; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:24:22 GMT
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249072203A; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:24:22 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.224]) by vs3.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F02522032; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:24:22 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([84.93.88.219]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id wBEDOLnT014231 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:24:21 GMT
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Julien Meuric' <julien.meuric@orange.com>, pce@ietf.org
References: <4ddabd6a-1e36-cc3e-cef8-3aa03734125d@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <4ddabd6a-1e36-cc3e-cef8-3aa03734125d@orange.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:24:19 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <070701d493b0$52584230$f708c690$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQK+ns6kZ9zYzEymtdww+MLAArEi4KOp/Xjg
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 84.93.88.219
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-24286.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--6.943-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--6.943-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-24286.001
X-TMASE-Result: 10--6.943000-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: UuaOI1zLN1jxIbpQ8BhdbEhEDfw/93BuGSqdEmeD/nVX14Hy+eYp74Y8 dX4VX7iTjVNY+SlHdHmODSNYghOh5hCgP4uv/JEph2VzUlo4HVNY8mfhSYy5Uv5Ndkm9jGh5YhJ Lrfd3VmpoTEHC2+l7XE3Zi8ax3Q0Zy0VPpWGlsb7M1jffIgQXhvpLmlOqU14CtXl9IxEPXOq5JF o/J5WsT4iuAKERurZwwg7OQywnrt5wH4sGDIqhGdxajlW+zwxCBgA+oehWZhEM74Nf6tTB9mFdb TYzRFE9RNfTIF6Pj4oaSf42XL0k09pK8zXAihU+SxG/I0MjmF5o3Yq5PCwLAsnaL1ri/ilX7yR7 0UzaHOH1Ewy14z2zGx5hmP6OM/PJTX7PJ/OU3vL+xOhjarOnHis3zPQeiEbe+gtHj7OwNO38o7Y s1NK4Y1IscJkBd9dqiuN/9GA1JxUzKKDgrj0WAOYVFFoJroHp
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/-9hBzmuZ3Rn-SupggPt0JphscDM>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption Poll for draft-lazzeri-pce-residual-bw
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 13:24:29 -0000

All,

I read the draft this morning and have no objections, per se. There is
obviously a lot of editorial work to be done, but that is fine and normal at
this stage.

The main challenge I found was determining exactly what the purpose of the
extensions was. I would welcome a clearer statement up front about why these
extensions are needed and what they will enable to happen. I didn't really
get this until reading Section 3 and then 5.1.


Nit to fix soonish. 

In 2.1 you have "priority >= p" forgetting the joy in RFC 3209 that the
highest priority has the lowest numeric value.

Thanks,
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: Pce <pce-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Julien Meuric
Sent: 13 December 2018 13:05
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adoption Poll for draft-lazzeri-pce-residual-bw

Dear WG,

We discussed about draft-lazzeri-pce-residual-bw a couple of times
during past IETF meetings. At that time, those in the room who had read
it looked quite interested, but they were just a few. We now request a
feedback from the list: do you support the adoption of
draft-lazzeri-pce-residual-bw as a starting point for a PCE work item?
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lazzeri-pce-residual-bw-01)

Please respond to the list, including your reasons if you do not support.

Thanks

Julien


P.S.: We are aware that the latest version of the I-D has expired, but
an adoption would solve that and a lack of interest may help the authors
focus their effort on something else than a simple timer reset.

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email