IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] Whither Stateless PCE?

Robert Varga <nite@hq.sk> Thu, 08 September 2016 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <nite@hq.sk>
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 C803512B14D for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 02:38:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.508
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.508 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hq.sk
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 jbMdnseLNuGf for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 02:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hq.sk (hq.sk [81.89.59.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A061E12B0E0 for <pce@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 02:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.137.1.13] (46.229.239.158.host.vnet.sk [46.229.239.158]) by mail.hq.sk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 530D824376B; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 11:38:33 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hq.sk; s=mail; t=1473327513; bh=Dp20Qbr9eobXgrGxXmf6Em0sIJZclpEJcyZunDJk/yc=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=CTse/EST7e17g6/h4HT1nEZaR2/5uFgzxbs6aRslFOlHk1j3G47xdT23p566cgdIu r8r68gxVCxwLWSJ6WkQs3vHj+HtpW/k3JDIke2qY9UFDxCHiq9qOF4c3s81XlQSvH4 6/Fd3TqM6toGMWRCqtiHUwjm/KNUtOe8XcFhf8DQ=
To: Ina Minei <inaminei@google.com>, Olivier Dugeon <olivier.dugeon@orange.com>
References: <091b01d19036$a22f2f10$e68d8d30$@olddog.co.uk> <d17605c4-c0b1-cc2f-45b4-e43f1844dfc4@hq.sk> <CAG4Q_at0uqErDqAUVm0Ui9BkHP5ju7BYfNWCjbQZOEA9_i7qMw@mail.gmail.com> <4954_1470727984_57A98730_4954_3928_1_796d9606-a529-4261-82d6-a8c2d930b042@OPEXCLILM6D.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAG4Q_avg8_P-ywW1sCBTX-XcB2-UFk4J2bUCrZ0-85Sh8xUn=Q@mail.gmail.com> <5007_1470986552_57AD7938_5007_1163_1_ed4811b2-034d-4104-be0f-5d58ab25004e@OPEXCLILM44.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <57AD9751.8020308@orange.com> <F9C16EDC-8478-464D-A799-A61EA5475690@nokia.com> <2a6339b5-2b73-c6d9-4c02-790600300de6@orange.com> <CAG4Q_au9D0KY8YKXLVNrmk5fdzGhNeGnERvebR=Dod=fvJFxEA@mail.gmail.com> <57C94641.4030603@orange.com> <9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF921BD66EA2@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <57C96FDE.4040203@orange.com> <CAG4Q_atd2V0XRCabA_uKei52P6QF+jqN7_uTEgba+SV=xhRP-A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Varga <nite@hq.sk>
Message-ID: <6fdbbab9-b1a7-7ac8-6e68-db501190e0f4@hq.sk>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 11:38:24 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAG4Q_atd2V0XRCabA_uKei52P6QF+jqN7_uTEgba+SV=xhRP-A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="o0HhwkAlRSiWM3huKqmbKhWAdRKvxp8fn"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/ckShU1NzjIG4HSDWW993JeVmb1g>
Cc: "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Whither Stateless PCE?
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 09:38:39 -0000

On 09/07/2016 05:57 PM, Ina Minei wrote:
> I think if we replace MUST with SHOULD in the text you provided that
> would work for the transition. Can implementors comment on the impact?

The change in PCRpt format is incompatible with fielded installations.

OpenDaylight will refuse a PCRpt consisting of (LSP, NO-PATH) and will
raise an Mandatory Object Missing PCErr, leading to failure to perform
initial state synchronization. The requirement has been there since
revision 05 (at least) and has been clarified in revision 16.

Bye,
Robert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email