IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Pce] 答复: Adoption of draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03

Zhenghaomian <zhenghaomian@huawei.com> Thu, 18 February 2021 03:35 UTC

Return-Path: <zhenghaomian@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 9B57D3A1F6C for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:35:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=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 TKmkQs6DP7Pm for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:35:27 -0800 (PST)
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 5C10C3A1F68 for <pce@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:35:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.200]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Dh0cN6LB7z67pCQ for <pce@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:31:32 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.50) by fraeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2106.2; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 04:35:25 +0100
Received: from DGGEML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.49) by fraeml701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.2106.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 04:35:24 +0100
Received: from DGGEML511-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.54]) by dggeml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.3.17.49]) with mapi id 14.03.0509.000; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:35:19 +0800
From: Zhenghaomian <zhenghaomian@huawei.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03
Thread-Index: AQHW+MKBP34DC5+p/0m5a6kRPOAgSqpaNf6AgAMmR7A=
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 03:35:18 +0000
Message-ID: <E0C26CAA2504C84093A49B2CAC3261A43FAB2BF5@dggeml511-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <CAP7zK5YxLUw_TvG-EBQXSfMcYUaeck+FZ=8o9+fbxJW=v59teA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP7zK5bxR9ONqKjp-andF_SQNXJiK2tHkd6LGfKFkfhXixch7g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP7zK5bxR9ONqKjp-andF_SQNXJiK2tHkd6LGfKFkfhXixch7g@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.24.176.98]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E0C26CAA2504C84093A49B2CAC3261A43FAB2BF5dggeml511mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/epNW7rIxlp0nbAGQhABxzGzWVyM>
Subject: [Pce] 答复: Adoption of draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03
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: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 03:35:30 -0000

Yes/Support. The usage of flags in PCEP needs to be carefully managed, and the LSP-based extension is an essential step to move forward.

Best wishes,
Haomian



发件人: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Dhruv Dhody
发送时间: 2021年2月16日 19:28
收件人: pce@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03

Hi WG,

We *need* to hear from more of you before taking a call on adoption. It is a straightforward "house-keeping" document, but we need to see explicit expressions of support (and comments).

We are extending the call till Friday, Feb 19th. Please respond with your support (or not) for this adoption.

Regards,
Dhruv & Julien

On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 11:17 PM Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com<mailto:dd@dhruvdhody.com>> wrote:
Hi WG,

This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03

This is a small draft that extends the flags in the LSP Objects by
defining a new LSP-EXTENDED-FLAG TLV. Note that the existing
sub-registry "LSP Object Flag Field" is almost fully assigned.

https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#lsp-object-flag-field

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 15th Feb.

Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email