Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00.txt

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 09 November 2019 09:05 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.ietf@gmail.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 BE330120902 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 01:05:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 4Mu--rC8Z_98 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 01:05:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDC45120121 for <pce@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 01:05:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id l17so7665389wmh.0 for <pce@ietf.org>; Sat, 09 Nov 2019 01:05:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=nDSfw//GBPsPxBhWphraJhMiPO+f1j3jE1JCg4DmxCE=; b=Ci4zKApwCAYDMG14O/DH+bcym1RxTXcdyjcTE+FDdpmjrHhw79RyS+qsfclKuFelmg hLUTFzf8qNaxECRwb4dk5+rxoz2aNcFg7aEsJwMxpcD0CuccibAS6GrNPKruXMfcBduH wxU5u/1nsWAdmqPwGPoM1CSn7IpIHAl8IvqnFvTnE5izfPN+ozY0GNKsXn1DmR/srC/a S/lKcEJHTysRRFsfbV5rEOl66nmos1USMpd93ntYCCzOhcA7iJw90zNuKqgtS8KNg2f8 M7XX9VUHxJrfNBqDFzE0z4p4OO9dvLVRHMR1Sb/r1lj/wAqXGTROulGMDbbeZJVhp1c/ SwQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=nDSfw//GBPsPxBhWphraJhMiPO+f1j3jE1JCg4DmxCE=; b=GIPxF3fpPcAuqKp3z8olXOSw4/DCbakcOqTRDhGMPq0qkjnIq1nu4NtQJlBjPwgpAK FISJDKWTlLOb/95qF1zL7X9VYUh9adWUny8i1g6ID17pOurEymEm5XcRLkR6z8YPK5/n 37JG1ZSiGxcIEK7X5FheONPafEkq/ALXSupz21L+Xwf14Zq7B7zvM6OCgt9P4j+otqJo yY929CjZrVQ4bfbthanYT0szz+41kV4z0X2KV6kbEufA2g+nPOEWfb3a21c6AA/VnLz3 fD0N55wBtZ0dRlrM/wvqJ8wthiqwAxvD85abxv7vqG0yIP6JowQN8PuW4hKlDp27tM8j 1PQg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX9CIKS79+oaSkPy7bn9cqb4puwC3HZ36ZGIC6ykGd70e2UyyTC irPU0apUfwz2/a+lhBWKKI7304Sn
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxse50gkZ23vMuXon6ZU6oL1CmlPzOIWBsDV8pIg5JqlKmM1gwmsvD2opGrWD0E2VTojo5y0g==
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:558a:: with SMTP id j132mr11880314wmb.21.1573290349238; Sat, 09 Nov 2019 01:05:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.4.2.125] ([195.55.86.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y9sm7824768wma.3.2019.11.09.01.05.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 09 Nov 2019 01:05:48 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 10:05:48 +0100
Message-Id: <D9B7CBF3-93EB-4DA9-82D5-A57888E58C0B@gmail.com>
References: <BL0PR02MB4868AF5B662F53A108A3CFD1847A0@BL0PR02MB4868.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <BL0PR02MB4868AF5B662F53A108A3CFD1847A0@BL0PR02MB4868.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
To: Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick=40metaswitch.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17A878)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/m5S8MV7BbNIexwoJHaU5v8lJmPk>
Subject: Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00.txt
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: Sat, 09 Nov 2019 09:05:55 -0000

+1

Regards,
Jeff

> On Nov 9, 2019, at 09:53, Jonathan Hardwick <Jonathan.Hardwick=40metaswitch.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; wrote:
> 
> I support publication.
> Cheers
> Jon
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>; 
> Sent: 08 November 2019 16:07
> To: pce@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00.txt
> 
> Hi WG,
> 
> As instructed by our AD, I-D has been posted with the file name change
> - draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00.
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags/
> 
> The chairs request the WG to reaffirm that the WG supports the publication of the I-D by Friday 22nd Nov. We request you to be vocal to enable us to judge consensus (and justify it).
> 
> Thanks!
> Dhruv & Julien
> 
> 
>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:30 PM <internet-drafts@ietf.org>; wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element WG of the IETF.
>> 
>>        Title           : Updated Rules for Processing Stateful PCE Request Parameters Flags
>>        Author          : Adrian Farrel
>>        Filename        : draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00.txt
>>        Pages           : 6
>>        Date            : 2019-11-07
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>   Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
>>   (PCEP) to support stateful Path Computation Elements (PCEs) are
>>   defined in RFC 8231.  One of the extensions is the Stateful PCE
>>   Request Parameters (SRP) object.  That object includes a Flags field
>>   that is a set of 32 bit flags, and RFC 8281 defines an IANA registry
>>   for tracking assigned flags.  However, RFC 8231 does not explain how
>>   an implementation should set unassigned flags in transmitted
>>   messages, nor how an implementation should process unassigned,
>>   unknown, or unsupported flags in received messages.
>> 
>>   This document updates RFC 8231 by defining the correct behaviors.
>> 
>> 
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags/
>> 
>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-flags-00
>> 
>> 
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>> 
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pce mailing list
>> Pce@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> Pce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce