IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04

"Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com> Fri, 18 May 2018 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <rgandhi@cisco.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 1966A12DA51; Fri, 18 May 2018 08:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 dxxh0qSvWijZ; Fri, 18 May 2018 08:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86B6112D96C; Fri, 18 May 2018 08:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=23024; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1526657890; x=1527867490; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=cZcA6wVvQT2kYndnBF4949jgJsb8oWt9En3QuwqDgLY=; b=MEbYxR1pFszo3fksxNYpn1DlapdrAwkq7ccfR4RI0RjmpyybP1p5Qp7p aHyr4uvvIg1o/DODU7+HUCNupDtzBGtKoEbJc2w7OMwH1Te6sw5374Il2 MhMuvG+ShgCIJLZm1Qh3QgMQWCyS8DtQ3NGtU7auQbWH+3bEuYV+bb4ic I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DxAADl8v5a/5BdJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJNdmF9KAqDaogEjHeBWCGBD5M2FIFkCyWERwIagXchNBgBAgEBAQEBAQJsHAyFKAEBAQQjCkwQAgEIEQMBAQEoAwICAjAUCQgBAQQBDQWDIwKBG2QPqBCCHB+IH4IiBYg1gVQ/gTIMgl2DEQEBAgEBFoEOAQQBEgEtEhaCSjCCJAKRFIc4CQKFaIhtgTeDbYZIgRGHToIRhnECERMBgSQBHDhhcXAVOyoBghiLEIU+b406DxeBCIEYAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,415,1520899200"; d="scan'208,217";a="116002984"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 May 2018 15:38:09 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-019.cisco.com (xch-rcd-019.cisco.com [173.37.102.29]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w4IFc9uZ027403 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 18 May 2018 15:38:09 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com (173.36.7.28) by XCH-RCD-019.cisco.com (173.37.102.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Fri, 18 May 2018 10:38:09 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) by XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Fri, 18 May 2018 10:38:08 -0500
From: "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>, Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick@metaswitch.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "draft-barth-pce-association-bidir@ietf.org" <draft-barth-pce-association-bidir@ietf.org>
CC: "pce-chairs@ietf.org" <pce-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04
Thread-Index: AdPQ1K+dRZlrFVm2SGushMxlPX46zgEiN3CgBlpDLgA=
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 15:38:08 +0000
Message-ID: <FE9ED576-2E15-4C24-8372-6DADE8981F74@cisco.com>
References: <CY1PR0201MB143666BCBBFB5C00E0073E4284BE0@CY1PR0201MB1436.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B8D681080@BLREML503-MBS.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B8D681080@BLREML503-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1d.0.161209
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.87.151]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FE9ED5762E154C2483726DADE8981F74ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/FQHLLiNmJNkg76Jqzw6IxECaacI>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 18 May 2018 15:38:13 -0000

Hi Dhruv,

Many thanks for your review and suggestions.

Please see inline with <RG>…

From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
Date: Monday, April 16, 2018 at 5:06 AM
To: Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick@metaswitch.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "draft-barth-pce-association-bidir@ietf.org" <draft-barth-pce-association-bidir@ietf.org>
Cc: "pce-chairs@ietf.org" <pce-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04

Support!

A few comments that can be handled in the later versions


(1)     An error handling when this condition is not met –



   o  An LSP can not be part of more than one Bidirectional LSP

      Association Group.

<RG> Added in Section 5.5.



(2)     Update the section 2.1 with new template based on RFC8174
<RG> Updated Section 2.1.


(3)     In section 3.1, add clarity on who reports the reverse LSP LSP2, the remote endpoint D or the originating node A? Need to consider deletion and status down as well.
<RG> Updated Section 3.1 and added Figure 2A and 2B.


(4)     Clarification on if more than one forward and reverse LSP can be part of the association group
<RG> Updated in Section 4.1. More than one forward LSP and/ or reverse LSP can be part of a Bidirectional LSP Association Group.


(5)     A word on association source maybe simply a reference to [I-D.ietf-pce-association] will do!
<RG> Updated Section 4.1.

Revised document can be found at:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-01



A diff from the previous version is available at:

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-01

Welcome your further review comments and suggestions.

Thanks,
Rakesh


Thanks!
Dhruv

From: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: 10 April 2018 19:35
To: pce@ietf.org; draft-barth-pce-association-bidir@ietf.org
Cc: pce-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04

Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04 a PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barth-pce-association-bidir/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating “yes/support” or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, April 24.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email