Re: [Teas] WG adoption poll - draft-zheng-teas-gmpls-controller-inter-work

Vishnu Pavan Beeram <> Tue, 28 May 2019 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D4931200EF; Tue, 28 May 2019 00:49:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id egP1SMavUyCB; Tue, 28 May 2019 00:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::531]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B70D1200CE; Tue, 28 May 2019 00:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id d30so10456831pgm.7; Tue, 28 May 2019 00:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lSh8X8vsS/qddCmyQJ2iyYriOdYweyLIPpWViLg7FhE=; b=DdwRnuC2oaOvMq1nb+2YfypKWKvuYA/FkvUJH9/uBxA3L+Popx6DOVTP8aqWOCTY1O uY1Sad74UVlG4dCUHOXaK1KEg5rTHChDFOsAeS4ZiK/Hxj7d6KyhksflAwkwAKEb0H7E weXoPdTKtPxuf0bLl27b42uv9BGS8NkbAUb6ELO5LFWIZDd9PWyr7wbgS8supX/7/Emj ipGgfATLcdq1zNz7TIOONp0SwM4/7VKPX3UEaNod5gJDykFRWzcG6wcF59qAVyh3v93U Uvr4IvcxbBzyE/Tu7rYyWpgjGr9QHWO8Gk3/NJIL7nRiCOJ6mshQvBTkFdd6eNAM3DPn jUkg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lSh8X8vsS/qddCmyQJ2iyYriOdYweyLIPpWViLg7FhE=; b=qxGlvxOfDvHVtTY/YO+cDs+wUCkbV7F59T/ZGvLI71wzPLgx4wFK6zzcPB0bUdBQ9Q gRLxLd/P6+H6PWD9tebmWX6/wlhHTq2f0YY2systln/dlvVJoPOvJRnTZhVPlD6tfprB 88lLkkt4w+ostpwZfswCVk5HLe6I6mhIYoP4wIlksqLsWH3QOgBrEJl+bgvem2XCjANH mWn1RwAkoLXv13uonyQIOcWDutTHoohQqVYni3D6lOM7OS75cqxBNP5+wwn+jSYRoI7X aD6wqNVHG1XCSik1t0mfykwT2TEcziSx6rEUir1j5cWIbupMd8KiLaahBdhsErtlspA4 xmxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV6Q8xIC1Hj9NiRruqLjODgoMsWG0l7FxueyNdIGS5sfmYIdma1 OiWDY6pH2j1bPTxKxaNuYE/qvfbE4O90ClcbNLEMcilYiik=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqweBKmyHj4N8lJZHAGfvl1ZxDLSqcr7vL4AdORCgSLLsFkekgNP6A6XJGMZL5l3tJSTNXRExbBXY/l7/eijRUs=
X-Received: by 2002:a63:c14:: with SMTP id b20mr131135447pgl.163.1559029759395; Tue, 28 May 2019 00:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 02:49:08 -0500
Message-ID: <>
To: TEAS WG <>
Cc: TEAS WG Chairs <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000000cac20589ede703"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Teas] WG adoption poll - draft-zheng-teas-gmpls-controller-inter-work
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 07:49:22 -0000

[Chair hat off]

Authors, Hi!

I would like to see the following discussed on the list:

— Please explain what is it that this document is trying to say that hasn’t
been discussed before (imho, this isn’t clearly articulated in the
document). There are sufficient number of existing documents that discuss
how GMPLS paths can be computed, placed, optimized, rerouted and maintained
in the network. There are also a fair number of documents that discuss how
these paths can be controlled (at the head end) by a PCE based controller.
Is the document just trying to say that these GMPLS paths can also be
controlled (at the head end) via non-PCEP means (is that all that this
document is trying to say)?

— In a document about the interworking of “distributed and centralized
control”, I would have liked to see some discussion on the pros and cons of
(/recommendations on) distributing or centralizing certain TE functions. Is
non-headend (TE Tunnel transit) control out of scope? Please do explain the
overall scope of this document?

-Pavan (as a WG participant)

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:35 AM Vishnu Pavan Beeram <>

> All,
> This is start of a two week poll on making
> draft-zheng-teas-gmpls-controller-inter-work-03 a TEAS working group
> document.
> Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or "no/do not
> support". If indicating no, please state your reservations with the
> document. If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd
> like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.
> The poll ends June 10th.
> Thanks,
> Pavan and Lou