Re: [Pce] Is there any activity related to PCE graceful restart?

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

Sasha,
 
What are you hoping to achieve?
 
That a restarting PCE can retain its TED and LSP-DB?
That a restarting PCE can synch state with the network?
That a restarting PCE with outstanding (unanswered) messages in either direction
can not need to resend them?
That a restarting PCE can resend outstanding (unanswered) messages without
problems caused by duplication?
 
I think you may want to read around the definition of the request-id. Although
5440 doesn't make it explicit, a lot comes from how you process the request-id.
That "a lot" arose from consideration of parallel sessions and distilled to not
needing to write about restart.
 
Cheers,
Adrian (resurrecting old memories, possibly not entirely accurately)
 
From: Pce [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alexander Vainshtein
Sent: 18 June 2017 16:43
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: Marina Fizgeer; Michael Gorokhovsky; [e-mail]; Alexander Ferdman
Subject: Re: [Pce] Is there any activity related to PCE graceful restart?
 
Re-sending with the correct WG mailing list address.
 
Regards,
Sasha
 
Office: [phone]
Cell:      [phone]
Email:   [e-mail]
 
From: Alexander Vainshtein 
Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 6:41 PM
To: '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
'[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; '[e-mail]'
<[e-mail]>
Cc: '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>; Michael Gorokhovsky
<[e-mail]>; Marina Fizgeer <[e-mail]>;
Alexander Ferdman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Is there any activity related to PCE graceful restart?
 
Hi all,
My colleagues and I tried to find any work in the PCE WG related to PCEP
graceful restart.
So far, we did not succeed. This could mean one of the following:
-          Our search did not go deep enough. In this case pointers to any
specific documents would be highly appreciated
-          Such work does not exist because (for some reason) it is not
required. This looks problematic to me, especially if we deal with a stateful
active PCE and the path computed by the PCE was implemented using Segment
Routing (so that only the head end of the computed path is aware of the path).
However, I could have missed something obvious, and any clarifications would be
highly appreciated
-          Such work is required but, so far, nobody has taken care of it. The
implications are obvious:-(.
 
Your feedback would be highly appreciated.
 
Regards, and lots of thanks in advance,
Sasha
 
Office: [phone]
Cell:      [phone]
Email:   [e-mail]
 

___________________________________________________________________________

This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information
which is 
CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received
this 
transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete
the original 
and all copies thereof.
___________________________________________________________________________