Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05

[[e-mail]]

Hi Samuel,

Thanks for your quick reply!
Yes, I agree with you. The extensions may be applicable for RSVP-TE,SR,SRv6,native IP, but I am not sure about it with BIER-TE and PCECC.
It works well for me to explicitly describe for each extension whether it is generic or applicable to specific setup type.
Thanks for your work!


Best Regards,
Quan




Original


From: SamuelSidor(ssidor) <[e-mail]>
To: 熊泉00091065;
Cc: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>;[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;
Date: 2023年12月14日 16:27
Subject: RE: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05



Hi Quan,
 
(sorry I sent it before finishing mail)
 
Originally we listed explicitly only RSVP-TE and SR-TE and then we modified based on comments from Dhruv to all setup types (attached mail).
 
Extensions covered in this draft were introduced to support required extensions for CS policies, but at least some of those extensions (if specific section is not describing something else) is potentially applicable to other setup types. E.g. extensions from section 3.2 for blocking re-computation.
 
We can still drop that specific statement and explicitly describe for each extension whether it is generic or applicable to specific setup type only. Would that work for you?
 
Thanks,
Samuel
 


From: Samuel Sidor (ssidor) 
 Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 9:24 AM
 To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
 Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
 Subject: RE: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05



 
Hi Quan,
 
Originally we explicitly listed
 

From: Pce <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of [e-mail]
 Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 7:53 AM
 To: [e-mail]
 Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
 Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05


 
Hi Dhruv,
 
I support the adoption of this draft. Thanks for the work from authors.
But I am confused about section 1 "PCEP extensions described in this document are applicable to all Path   Setup Types".
This draft mainly focus on the Circuit Style Policies and SR policy but path setup types include RSVP-TE,SR,PCECC,SRv6, Native IP TE path  and the newly adopted BIER-TE.
I suggest that it is better to provide clarification about other path setup types or remove this sentence.
 
Thanks,
Quan
 
<<Hi WG,   <<This email begins the WG adoption poll for <<draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05.https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions/Should this draft be adopted by the PCE <<WG? Please state your reasons - Why <</ Why not? What needs to be fixed before or after adoption? Are you willing <<to work on this draft? Review comments should be posted to the list.   <<Please respond by Friday 15th Dec 2023.   <<Please be more vocal during WG polls!   <<Thanks! <<Dhruv & Julien