IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com> Wed, 30 March 2022 03:51 UTC

Return-Path: <jie.dong@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 C38873A0B28; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 20:51:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 1H2tuSV_okOZ; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 20:51:30 -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 AB1BC3A0B02; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 20:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml741-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.207]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4KSsrF0MTJz67x2x; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:49:33 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemi100016.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.123) by fraeml741-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.222) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 05:51:25 +0200
Received: from kwepemi500017.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.110) by kwepemi100016.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.123) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.21; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:51:23 +0800
Received: from kwepemi500017.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.110]) by kwepemi500017.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.110]) with mapi id 15.01.2308.021; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:51:23 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu@ietf.org" <draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05
Thread-Index: AQHYQr58lhA9+fACC02coypgfVI9ZazXSFFg
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 03:51:23 +0000
Message-ID: <dc8aba6162fc4e018bd324346f39bba1@huawei.com>
References: <CAP7zK5bC95SwqbPC-Fm1-bTyAmaVOb-O5Bg4CKqe3tSe=LUzZQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP7zK5bC95SwqbPC-Fm1-bTyAmaVOb-O5Bg4CKqe3tSe=LUzZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.112.40.66]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_dc8aba6162fc4e018bd324346f39bba1huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/_ZPwqRpO1gyU2tNCE3ZYZz7G1CQ>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05
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, 30 Mar 2022 03:51:33 -0000

Hi Chairs,

I’ve read this document and support its adoption.

And here are my replies to the questions:

Should this draft be adopted by the PCE WG?

Yes

Please state your reasons - Why / Why not?

PMTU is an important characteristic of the path, which needs to be considered in both path computation and path instantiation.

What needs to be fixed before or after adoption?

Since this extension is generic and applicable to both SR and non-SR paths, the description about SR related mechanisms in the introduction section may be simplified.

Are you willing to work on this draft?

Yes, I am willing to review the future versions of this document.

Best regards,
Jie


From: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 12:09 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05

Hi WG,

This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu-05.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-pmtu/

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.

Please respond by Monday 11th April 2022.

Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email