IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] WGLC for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12

xiong.quan@zte.com.cn Mon, 15 January 2024 03:01 UTC

Return-Path: <xiong.quan@zte.com.cn>
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 7EDFAC14F60D; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 19:01:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.903 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, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D1sJH3irq7sm; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 19:01:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 603B1C14F5FF; Sun, 14 Jan 2024 19:01:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.5.228.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4TCxkM0Cfmz8XrRT; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:01:47 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njb2app07.zte.com.cn ([10.55.22.95]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 40F31QQZ022303; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:01:26 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from xiong.quan@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njb2app06[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:01:27 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:01:27 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afe65a4a0072f5-38d49
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202401151101276488103@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn
To: dd@dhruvdhody.com, draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp@ietf.org
Cc: pce@ietf.org, pce-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 40F31QQZ022303
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 65A4A01B.001/4TCxkM0Cfmz8XrRT
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/jFL7qWBOCR_XGNUrUqdzZtBk7uQ>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WGLC for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 03:01:59 -0000

Hi PCE WG, Authors,I have reviewed the latest version in details and I feel this draft is good written and I support the progression to RFC.
And I have two minor suggestions.
A，I noticed the [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] and [I-D.ietf-pce-multipath] are in the Normative References. I am not sure if the two drafts should be moved to Informative References when progess to RFC.
B, AS per [RFC9256] section 8.1, an SR policy is invalid when all candidate paths are invalid and the SR policy should  transit to invalid state including removing the SR Policy and BSID and so.
Maybe it is better to consider or clarify that in the PCEP SR policy. Thanks!


Best Regards,
Quan

<<Hi WG,

<<This email starts a 2-weeks working group last call for
<<draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12.https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp/Please indicate your support or concern for this <<<<draft. If you are opposed
<<to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If
<<you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version and
<<it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and
<<nits are most welcome.

<<The WG LC will end on Monday 22nd January 2024.

<<A general reminder to the WG to be more vocal during the last-call/adoption.

<<Thanks,
<<Dhruv & Julien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email