[Pce] Document Action: 'PCE Communication Protocol (PCECP) Specific Requirements for Inter-Area Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering' to Informational RFC

The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Thu, 15 March 2007 21:45 UTC

Return-path: <pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HRxlf-0006u5-TA; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:45:51 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HRxlc-0006q2-BB; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:45:48 -0400
Received: from ns3.neustar.com ([156.154.24.138]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HRxlc-0006AA-1E; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:45:48 -0400
Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns3.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED65517684; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:45:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HRxl7-0003JJ-Nn; Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:45:17 -0400
X-test-idtracker: no
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <E1HRxl7-0003JJ-Nn@stiedprstage1.ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:45:17 -0400
X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe
Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>, pce mailing list <pce@ietf.org>, pce chair <pce-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: [Pce] Document Action: 'PCE Communication Protocol (PCECP) Specific Requirements for Inter-Area Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering' to Informational RFC
X-BeenThere: pce@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pce>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'PCE Communication Protocol (PCECP) Specific Requirements for 
   Inter-Area Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS 
   (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering '
   <draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-05.txt> as an Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Path Computation Element Working 
Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Ross Callon and Bill Fenner.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-05.txt

Technical Summary
 
   This document lists a detailed set of requirements for the Path 
   Computation Element Communication Protocol for support of inter-
   area TE-LSP path computation. This specifically applies to paths 
   that cross multiple areas within a single IGP routing domain. It 
   complements the generic requirements for a PCE Communication 
   Protocol. 
 
Working Group Summary
 
   no dissent reported. 
 
Protocol Quality
 
   Ross Callon has reviewed this spec for the IESG. As a requirements 
   document, it inherently isn't implemented, but there is ongoing 
   work to update the PCE Communications Protocol to handle inter-area
   path computation consistent with these requirements. 

Note to RFC Editor
 
   The email address for Nabil Bitar (in section 11 contributors'
   addresses) should be nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com. 

   Please replace the second paragraph of section 5 (Manageability
   Considerations) as follows:

   Old Text (one paragraph to be removed):

   A built in diagnostic tool MUST be defined to monitor the 
   performances of a PCE chain, in case of multiple-PCE inter-area path 
   computation. It MUST allow determining the minimum maximum and 
   average response time globally for the chain, and on a per PCE basis.

   New Text (two paragraphs to be added):

   It is really important, for diagnostic and troubleshooting reasons,
   to monitor the availability and performances of each PCE of a PCE
   chain used for inter-area path computation. Particularly it is 
   really important to identify the PCE(s) responsible for a delayed
   reply. 

   Hence a mechanism MUST be defined to monitor the performances of a
   PCE chain. It MUST allow determining the availability of each PCE
   of the chain as well as its minimum maximum and average response
   time.


_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce