Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp
Girish Birajdar <girish134@gmail.com> Tue, 05 July 2016 23:22 UTC
Return-Path: <girish134@gmail.com>
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 9426812D115 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 lyvPKJJr0VVK for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD9D512D0D9 for <pce@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id g4so53942310ith.1 for <pce@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=sW2n+G5i1UHCMRPo/24j9yQwD6lkQnIklm46+gvF0Mo=; b=HMFLwIth+MdBwIeWe/zHRp4fjnhOVS+yBt3B/NXoA5y2L9iBl74AH/0sQocfaD3ng+ ernDpcbXYjk3ZhoLtAMr2CGkJsrgIMNJ3SJ9fsJItkHlZ/WqucWpOfDbNXScLaKitr3q lEdqRWSsuVRDRieSn7p1FnlOTZ+QPULLRr39XxR6k1olEnJJMOb8qGo/BvoCDAJvXSdI 2MC7/8C5QGJtkOtgUMJtjHalPYa2wITJMtx2VzKMgVNBm2zJWJAH7LQ/WEAmBizNZZ6b /7JuCzm8exkhum/tJwAY4DPk1ldQ+nYT29iRAV3+06nqP9RD+zuQRlMDqX9Ri+shvFD/ zy+A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=sW2n+G5i1UHCMRPo/24j9yQwD6lkQnIklm46+gvF0Mo=; b=W31hZ3SsBgvLFby04YL1sI0nrkjzhRClyK7zcEsN+6dnbLNiaB/EnK4KhxHN/hDXyX j0JMEFF9+Zlvyt/LVR7bzgwZegCN3ZT2wjS3EQdRfEPADl0ofWM9yTI8ak5EylLJMfMW qiCx3zaD42iyT0OgS2Vac1R2UD3lpmiN9wjDLIS3M/wqiapgqaQTxJMFz3XiZ/l3FfeH Os94xb/Z3g3Ugkz3uf29uzRWnYQOp9eNdHCuu8OXZ3wnNTSVFeUSDfwHmuOTTcmxNEic X5oKq/CZssUZsaJ6LiKlJ280IiOxzxpfXsvBP64GOngUBKBQdLsViF24SaL+NoP9Ozcv EhmQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLvrKynrEpUwpuPFtM1mJ5vHRWffx2HqHo1qzG3tFlnXvS0hPWSzz0k2voiH6ASrqVoPsPyxFDLYbXy3A==
X-Received: by 10.36.184.3 with SMTP id m3mr2148566ite.90.1467760943217; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.129.103 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 16:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <834ECFC1-5C8F-4E29-BD22-D8F006BC1564@netcracker.com>
References: <834ECFC1-5C8F-4E29-BD22-D8F006BC1564@netcracker.com>
From: Girish Birajdar <girish134@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:22:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJO-zKfw-jyn--+sTwC0bmXaVME3tYTE+=M=_ScA-jQjp6XpAQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Veitch <andrew.veitch@netcracker.com>, draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c111cbaa2c30f0536ebb938"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/4DBX5gfirJ0XFwKYvcBGK8urxvQ>
Cc: "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 23:22:26 -0000
Hi, about #5.4 LSP deletion " A PLSP-ID of zero removes all LSPs that were initiated by the PCE... Following the removal of the LSP, the PCC MUST send a PCRpt as described in [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]. The SRP object in the PCRpt MUST include the SRP-ID-number from the PCInitiate message that triggered the removal. The R flag in the SRP object SHOULD be set. " The draft needs to clarify PCRpt message for such cases: 1. Does PCC send single PCRpt (with SRP-ID)? 2. PCC sends PCRpt for each deleted LSP. In such cases PCE will have to accept multiple PCRpt with same SRP-ID. Thanks -Girish On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Andrew Veitch <andrew.veitch@netcracker.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Is there an update regarding this draft and/or any additional supporting > work needed? Thanks. > > Andy > > > Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp > "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 03 May 2016 19:16 UTC > > Hi Ina, > Great that you have this under control. > > Looks like "review and review" are the actions on me. > Will do. > > Cheers, > Adrian > > From: Ina Minei [mailto:inaminei@google.com <inaminei@google.com>] > Sent: 02 May 2016 17:17 > To: 'Adrian Farrel' (adrian@olddog.co.uk) > Cc: pce; draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp > > Adrian, > > Thank you for bringing this up. I will repost the initiation draft, I am aware that it expired. Before doing so, will reply to what I think is the unfinished thread ( <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/wn4gGwZnTZS53pbyg1eCHw3YMVE> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/wn4gGwZnTZS53pbyg1eCHw3YMVE) , please let me know if there was a different thread that you are referring to. Thank you for bringing this up, this had completely fallen through the cracks on my end. > > Thank you for your offer to help with the stateful PCE I-D. Your help would be appreciated in letting us know if there are pending changes needed, as I > am assuming that the version posted a month ago addressed all issues, want to make sure this is not a similar situation as the initiation draft. > > Thank you, > > Ina > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 1:45 AM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote: > Hi All, > > In Buenos Aires Jon presented the WG status (thanks) and showed that > draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp is "Pending shepherd review". > > Just looking now (because quite a lot of new work seems to depend on the > PCInitiate message) I see that: > > - The I-D expired a couple of days ago (April 21, 2016) > > - The last discussion on the list was an email from Julien suggesting that > some work was needed to address open questions on the list. > > I'd like to see this I-D move forward now (as well as the stateful PCE I-D!). > Can I offer my assistance to the authors in any way? I am willing to shovel > shit, or just make editorial changes. > > Let's dig the WG out of the treacle and start to be relevant again :-) > > Thanks, > Adrian > > > > > ------------------------------ > The information transmitted herein is intended only for the person or > entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary > and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or > other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by > persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you > received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material > from any computer. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > >
- Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-… Girish Birajdar
- [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-… Loa Andersson
- Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-… Ina Minei
- Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Pce] Status of draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-… Andrew Veitch