[Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-11
Gyan Mishra via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 10 February 2021 23:02 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pce@ietf.org
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2AD3A0D50; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:02:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Gyan Mishra via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, pce@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.25.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <161299816586.3686.13209464455039168599@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:02:45 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/uDTZVTNzTWvkwvXKRqro5asEU7M>
Subject: [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-11
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 23:02:46 -0000
Reviewer: Gyan Mishra Review result: Almost Ready I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-?? Reviewer: Gyan Mishra Review Date: 2021-02-10 IETF LC End Date: 2021-02-08 IESG Telechat date: 2021-02-25 Summary: This document is very well written and describes a new PCEP protocol extension for using PCE as a centralized controller PCECC for provisioning using its own discrete label space for all or discrete parts static LSP ERO path. Major issues: None Minor issues: For stateful PCE how do you prevent label collisions when both the PCE is provisioning using its own label space and the routers also are using their own label space as well and have a mix of both. After the label download and sync at each router hop PCE PCC session their maybe some nodes that use the router label space and other nodes using PCE label space. It would seem more complicated to have a mix of having both PCE managed label space and non PCE managed label space and for this draft since it’s about provisioning static LSP using PCE discrete label space I think it would make more sense to have entire LSP to be provisioned using PCE label space to prevent label collisions. This caveat I think should be added to the considerations section as well. I did not see it mentioned but I think it’s also worthwhile mentioning what is the advantage of using this extension where the PCE uses its own label space. Also list the disadvantages as well so the operator had a clear picture of reasons to use this extension and maybe reasons to not use. It maybe also worthwhile to mention use cases where it makes sense to use this extension and others where it is not. In section 9 I agree it’s a good idea to have mutually authentication and encrypted sessions for all PCE PCC sessions to prevent malicious PCE using this extension. Nits/editorial comments: The abstract states the following in the last sentence which I think should better describe the goal and purpose of the draft. “ This document specifies the procedures and PCEP extensions for using the PCE as the central controller.” I would say use of PCE as a centralized controller for provisioning RSVP-TE or SR-TE static LSP explicit ERO path for all or parts of an LSP using its own discrete label space.
- [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-p… Gyan Mishra via Datatracker
- Re: [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-p… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-p… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Pce] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of dr… Alissa Cooper