Re: [Pce] EKR Discuss on draft-ietf-pce-pceps (was RE: Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-pce-pceps-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT))

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

I'd like to hear from the AD and chairs here. It seems to me that the
design I am suggesting is better, and if the primary argument is that the
editors don't want to make the change at this date, that's not very strong.
Conversely, I agree that this is a WG decision, so if you're telling me
that the WG considered this flavor and rejected it, then I think that's
reasonable and I'll remove my discuss.

-Ekr


On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi EKR,
>
>
>
> I have been told that my response [1] to your mail [2] has not reach some
> of the mailboxes.
>
>
>
> Thus on advice of our AD, I am starting a new thread to reach closure on
> this.
>
>
>
> The open point is -
>
> EKR suggested that we use the StartTLS message to indicate the local
> policy if the PCEP speaker is willing to connect without TLS. Whereas the
> current document does this by using the error message in case it is
> unwilling or unable to start the TLS.
>
>
>
> EKR proposal works, but will require us to add a new PCEP object -
> StartTLS object, as unfortunately there is no way to carry the information
> in the current message/objects format defined.
>
>
>
> As an editor, my opinion was to avoid making a change in encoding if
> possible, especially if the benefit is not big and the default setting is
> strict TLS.
>
>
>
> But if the opinion is towards “mandating” making the change, I can put out
> a version for review soon.
>
>
>
> All the other comments are handled in -16 [3]. Thanks for all the comments
> and discussions!
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dhruv
>
>
>
> [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pce/current/msg05487.html
>
> [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pce/current/msg05486.html
>
> [3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-16
>
>
>
>
>