[Pce] 答复: Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync

"Yangfan (IP Standard)" <shirley.yangfan@huawei.com> Wed, 26 May 2021 07:58 UTC

Return-Path: <shirley.yangfan@huawei.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 C86513A2527 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 May 2021 00:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 4mK9yu5Pt2Dt for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 May 2021 00:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25C4F3A2526 for <pce@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 May 2021 00:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml736-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.201]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Fqjlg0MRyz6887F for <pce@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:49:51 +0800 (CST)
Received: from nkgeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.156) by fraeml736-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Wed, 26 May 2021 09:58:39 +0200
Received: from nkgeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.156) by nkgeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58:37 +0800
Received: from nkgeml701-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.156]) by nkgeml701-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.156]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Wed, 26 May 2021 15:58:37 +0800
From: "Yangfan (IP Standard)" <shirley.yangfan@huawei.com>
To: "julien.meuric@orange.com" <julien.meuric@orange.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync
Thread-Index: AQHXSyJLD1j8kahoyEicft/09dP1mar07Xug
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 07:58:36 +0000
Message-ID: <3f07d5c127a84afc898f2fccd3e9743e@huawei.com>
References: <eeea136e-cd42-28b2-1669-07b82b460410@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <eeea136e-cd42-28b2-1669-07b82b460410@orange.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.243.115]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/TGny1hLnpS8WzHI3_5iZ_Vv19uA>
Subject: [Pce] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiAgQWRvcHRpb24gb2YgZHJhZnQtbGl0a293c2tp?= =?utf-8?q?-pce-state-sync?=
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: Wed, 26 May 2021 07:58:46 -0000

Hi PCE,

This draft provides a useful solution when stateful communications among multiple PCEs need synchronized. The use cases, procedures of protocol extensions are detailed and clearly written. I support the adoption of this draft. 

Regards, 
Fan 


-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 julien.meuric@orange.com
发送时间: 2021年5月17日 21:41
收件人: pce@ietf.org
主题: [Pce] Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync

Dear all,

The document draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync has reached the head of our adoption queue (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync/).

Do you consider this I-D is a good foundation for a WG item? Please share your feedback using the PCE mailing list by May 31.

Regards,

Dhruv & Julien