Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05 Thu, 14 December 2023 06:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D83EC14F61E; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 22:54:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HzZYSQ8A-cD2; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 22:54:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F77EC14CE33; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 22:54:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4SrNPl14Cjz8XrRD; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:54:35 +0800 (CST)
Received: from ([]) by with SMTP id 3BE6rOLI027728; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:53:24 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from
Received: from mapi (njy2app08[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:53:26 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:53:26 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2b00657aa6660a0-a4c68
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: 3BE6rOLI027728
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 657AA6AB.000/4SrNPl14Cjz8XrRD
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 06:54:45 -0000

Hi Dhruv,

I support the adoption of this draft. Thanks for the work from authors.
But I am confused about section 1 "PCEP extensions described in this document are applicable to all Path
   Setup Types".
This draft mainly focus on the Circuit Style Policies and SR policy but path setup types include RSVP-TE,SR,PCECC,SRv6, Native IP TE path  and the newly adopted BIER-TE.
I suggest that it is better to provide clarification about other path setup types or remove this sentence.


<<Hi WG,

<<This email begins the WG adoption poll for
<<draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-05. 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.

<<Please respond by Friday 15th Dec 2023.

<<Please be more vocal during WG polls!

<<Dhruv & Julien