Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-stateful-interdomain-04
Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 08 January 2021 09:32 UTC
Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@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 1DD7C3A11BA; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 01:32:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 LKhGOGjrP8-F; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 01:32:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd33.google.com (mail-io1-xd33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33]) (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 76BC13A11B9; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 01:32:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd33.google.com with SMTP id u26so9140549iof.3; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 01:32:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Oymw6c3XDgQeEG2pNH5G7acVtxmyNfrmo+A9TQet5mQ=; b=Spp5Pg5TD196YnO7+giZOMPWr6iPeSM7EScXIuM84Cv4hiSbG8oPpGczCiNuxoMYkq KLSLOb77N7k341vfYkvPiReGYiWuX0gw+2H5nXguFjKnZ0sIC9ZTtfpqDiKj0mLc0Ckn w82U2R7FQ0FsL92FTIQbC11r2ARSMYRLPK30piBWmjCyrPBAaovKIfwOQjUOTsXXb3ue wXaeipEU6ifjQpY6DAY/MVXxPD9ATmsaKO2Sv7t7wDiAvi4xbYsuewKQMG8NNctB1Y5B D7CM84+nBnZHuISR0eyq6j2sd6J9mcnJig9JngNRkVcune10alxk2yMv2qKz2CVm4xWJ lOfA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Oymw6c3XDgQeEG2pNH5G7acVtxmyNfrmo+A9TQet5mQ=; b=Pw7Gm+ZOSKoIbC1UhxSeVYReX/LWwBtvWQ4WlmB6RUuWRdi0Yalh16Mcf2J+Fq9sJ3 R7yxujvmT+18/OZna+7Mw7MsVzI5bJqcJByhQ7TBBd54J4GRe4Zh5zQRwz4C0gmdgwDC 9w2J1ktCSJa8vY8P+JAJqy2to+PDOkUfmpV3OLeYEfw7Eqip75uyDleDPtQ7U1kxxYfw 44v/X6WaYVXTAviUNmifrHoGMkgJct7nANj8Wp9k6r9sKa1ZZ98XI3LTy1+ydYcBD634 Ag1jPz59lM+41iNnihWY2pdr04negfrFSixxeYUtjb9yEnkz19N2SeHqUw3pUYtnxhpt XrCg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hdV6W40WArm4073Y5igy8PL8KSjll2rb1WcKXlHB3rOFRvUvt 337Gj632a8og4GR6IzRP47S75rpb9EqopowG8YSx6x0HhbVEiw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwwpQOOIKP7qicJmwX//sS33CQajWF288UBNjuCdaUu/K+asJIm2lLjKIYLgyCWkfK4syiuIvGpaEyqOQaFnNI=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:25d4:: with SMTP id u20mr2697978jat.54.1610098346276; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 01:32:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAP7zK5a1wD1vs=FyY_CyErGN_j5bFMFywVqr5CBZbD9gvRLy2g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP7zK5a1wD1vs=FyY_CyErGN_j5bFMFywVqr5CBZbD9gvRLy2g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 15:01:50 +0530
Message-ID: <CAB75xn5hvvB=fFboPjcfMpG5r7TE3Oqu8EKmYfnVizETVpLnGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: pce-chairs <pce-chairs@ietf.org>, Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/KXyTgMfep0krGjUWC5EUdWEp3_E>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-stateful-interdomain-04
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 08 Jan 2021 09:32:29 -0000
Hi WG, Authors, Speaking as a WG participant... I find the functionality described in this I-D to be very useful. But, I have one concern that I would like to be addressed before adoption or at least get an agreement on (to be handled post-adoption). I am not in favor of how the PST is being used in the I-D. The PST is used - - between PCEs to indicate inter-domain TE processing - between PCE and the head-end (2 PST for RSVP-TE & SR each, but for inter-domain i.e also allocate and report stitching label) We basically need a mechanism to request allocation and reporting of stitching labels. I strongly suggest using a flag and/or a new TLV, I find the use of PST for this inappropriate. A weird side-effect of the current proposal is that every time we have a new PST defined (PCECC is post-WGLC), we would need another one for inter-domain. Moreover, wouldn't it be better if this I-D is independent of the per-domain path setup type? Section 6.3 allows for mixed technologies and the protocol procedures between cooperating PCEs can be defined such that they are independent of the per-domain path setup type to allow for any current or future path setup types. I see no reason to differentiate between RSVP-TE and SR (section 6.2 is all about forwarding on border nodes, and not about PCEP). I discussed this with the authors earlier, where we basically pushed the can down the road, I hope we can resolve this quickly now :) Thanks! Dhruv (As a WG participant) On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 6:23 PM Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com> wrote: > > Hi WG, > > This email begins the WG adoption poll for > draft-dugeon-pce-stateful-interdomain-04. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dugeon-pce-stateful-interdomain-04 > > 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. > > To accommodate for the holiday season, this adoption poll will end on > 11th Jan 2021 (Monday). > > Thanks! > Dhruv > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
- [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-state… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Young Lee
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… olivier.dugeon
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Jeff Tantsura
- [Pce] 答复: WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Zhenghaomian
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Boris Khasanov
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… olivier.dugeon
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Belotti, Sergio (Nokia - IT/Vimercate)
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Luis M. Contreras
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… julien.meuric
- Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-dugeon-pce-s… Dhruv Dhody