IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] Update on draft-ietf-pce-policy-enabled-path-comp

JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com> Tue, 18 September 2007 22:09 UTC

Return-path: <pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXlGH-0000sO-7Q; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:09:41 -0400
Received: from pce by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IXlGF-0000oO-4N for pce-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:09:39 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXlGE-0000oG-PI for pce@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:09:38 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com ([171.68.10.87]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IXlGE-0001TG-At for pce@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:09:38 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,270,1186383600"; d="scan'208";a="176608642"
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Sep 2007 15:09:35 -0700
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com (sj-core-4.cisco.com [171.68.223.138]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l8IM9ZHK016673; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:09:35 -0700
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l8IM9CuS019997; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:09:17 GMT
Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:09:12 -0400
Received: from [10.86.104.178] ([10.86.104.178]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:09:11 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8144761F31F48D43AD53D09F5350E38001510648@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com>
References: <2166BDE3-E20D-4E45-B46D-CB8FB025C5FC@cisco.com> <8144761F31F48D43AD53D09F5350E38001510648@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <EFED7C9A-25C6-48B9-AC41-2B778A138B61@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Update on draft-ietf-pce-policy-enabled-path-comp
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:08:29 -0400
To: PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Sep 2007 22:09:11.0920 (UTC) FILETIME=[8AF03F00:01C7FA40]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2096; t=1190153375; x=1191017375; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20<jvasseur@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Pce]=20Update=20on=20draft-ietf-pce-policy-enabled-p ath-comp |Sender:=20; bh=jp8WxPF2oa7uE/Kwtq7WvmzbMhVtdg4XhR/jY8KCpMU=; b=OpDMxrAbkaaoYcgUv6kV59S4QlVwd4J5kGrXxfiqwPefSWI0yn7w+M/0FlStjq55U0E8bJgP qB7C4pEldEwHvwDobXljXVagzaFzMdlXaHQwF+5jKUjuIowu6fAl83hx;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135
Cc: JACQUENET Christian RD-TCH-REN <christian.jacquenet@francetelecom.com>, gash5107@yahoo.com, Thomas Walsh <twalsh@juniper.net>, pce@ietf.org, Igor Bryskin <ibryskin@movaz.com>
X-BeenThere: pce@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pce>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Hi Dimitri,

On Sep 18, 2007, at 4:04 PM, PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri wrote:

> j-p
>
> simple question: why only the policy doc. ?
>
> why are the other documents not liaised to IP Sphere ? or you would  
> like
> to reserve a specific treatment to the policy document (the enabler of
> the whole stuff at the inter-domain level) ?
>

As discussed during the last PCE IETF meeting and as reported in the  
minutes,
the idea was simply to see whether IPSphere might have comments/feed- 
backs
to provide. There is no "specific treatment", the idea of seeking for  
comments from
IPSphere on this document is motivated by the fact that they are  
actively working
on policy. This is not a formal liaison, just a proposal for comments.
Note that the goal is to not delay the progress of document by all  
means (thus the
dead-line for comments (mid-October).

Thanks.

JP.

> -d.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: JP Vasseur [mailto:jvasseur@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 8:10 PM
>> To: pce@ietf.org; Lou Berger; Igor Bryskin; Dimitri
>> Papadimitriou; gash5107@yahoo.com
>> Cc: Thomas Walsh; JACQUENET Christian RD-TCH-REN
>> Subject: [Pce] Update on draft-ietf-pce-policy-enabled-path-comp
>>
>> Dear WG,
>>
>> From the WG minutes of the IETF-69 meeting:
>>
>>
>> 12) Update on Policy-Enabled Path Computation Framework
>> draft-ietf-pce-policy-enabled-path-comp-01.txt (Lou - 5mn) [110]
>>
>>
>> Lou> ready for Last Call
>> JP> It sounds ready. Suggestion: offer IPSphere to have a
>> look at the doc before last call. JP will be the point
>> of contact. Asked Ross whether this is a good idea, and Ross
>> agreed. Once comments are received, last call.
>> Adrian> OK, but this is not an indefinite consultation. We
>> want to be able to move ahead and complete the I-D
>> relatively soon.
>>
>> We have contacted IPSphere and RA WG of IPSphere should
>> provide us some feed-back by
>> mid-October. I have copied Tom Walsh and Christian Jacquenet
>> (chair of the RAWG) IPSphere.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> JP.
>>


_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email