Resend
> Hi, > > During the IESG review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-14.txt, > several ADs noted that the BNF used in the specification > did not have a normative reference. > > The authors of PCEP had based their BNF usage on that > used in RSVP ([RFC2205], [RFC3209], and [RFC3473]) and it > turns out that these documents also don't have references > to any definition of BNF. > > On investigation, it appears that the form of BNF used in > these protocol specifications and in the definition of LMP > ([RFC4204]) deviates slightly from any existing definition > of BNF (cf. ABNF [RFC5234]). > > In order to rectify this and meet the IESG's requirements > for a reference in the PCEP spec, I have produced > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf-00.txt > > It would be very helpful if the members of the PCE working > group could quickly review this draft for consistency with > PCEP as used in draft-ietf-pce-pcep-14 and the various > protocol extension RFCs. > > Many thanks, > Adrian _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
