Re: [Pce] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-10: (with COMMENT)
Julien Meuric <julien.meuric@orange.com> Wed, 04 October 2017 16:34 UTC
Return-Path: <julien.meuric@orange.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 8365B13422B; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.533
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, 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 xep6YdcGeSfd; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from r-mail2.rd.orange.com (r-mail2.rd.orange.com [217.108.152.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B139D133074; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:34:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from r-mail2.rd.orange.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 51A8F5D86EB; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 18:34:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.194.32.11]) by r-mail2.rd.orange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3096F5D86C4; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 18:34:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.193.71.121] (10.193.71.121) by FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (10.194.32.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.361.1; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 18:34:00 +0200
To: Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick@metaswitch.com>, Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
CC: "draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp@ietf.org>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "pce-chairs@ietf.org" <pce-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <150366827632.19597.4644415881212125958.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CY4PR0201MB3603D485A2F7B51A8D8B42B884730@CY4PR0201MB3603.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
From: Julien Meuric <julien.meuric@orange.com>
Organization: Orange
Message-ID: <d246ab48-1b55-9265-816d-9fbbd24e59ce@orange.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2017 18:34:00 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR0201MB3603D485A2F7B51A8D8B42B884730@CY4PR0201MB3603.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/HOxgPrTVC54qcOUsSTIMociMtxA>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-10: (with COMMENT)
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: Wed, 04 Oct 2017 16:34:08 -0000
Hi all, We may add on top of the reasons below the strong impact PCE-initiation has from the implementation's perspective (which is somehow linked to the first 2 items). Up to I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce, it was all about configuration on PCCs, just allowing PCEs to trigger actions. I-D.ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp is a significant change: it enables PCEs to create on PCCs states which are not part of operator-specified PCCs' configuration. As a result, there has already been some commercial implementations at the stage described by the 2nd item. My 2 cents, Julien Oct. 04, 2017 - Jonathan.Hardwick@metaswitch.com: > 1) I'm wondering why this spec is not part of I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce as it is also not published yet...? > > Jon> It has been published now. The main reasons were > - it took longer for PCE-initiated LSPs to be accepted into the PCE WG, and the authors did not want to hold up work on the base draft > - I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce was a self-contained set of function and it was envisioned that there was a class of device that would not implement the LSP initiation extensions > - I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce was already fairly long and complex, and merging them would have been an editing / reviewing headache.
- [Pce] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-iet… Mirja Kühlewind
- Re: [Pce] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft… Jonathan Hardwick
- Re: [Pce] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft… Julien Meuric