Hi all,

I am also wondering what is PCE. 

Can PCE give a route or routes to someone unsolicitedly without path 
computation request (PCReq) from PCC?



Thanks

Fatai
 
Advanced Technology Department
Wireline Networking Business Unit
Huawei Technologies Co., LTD.
Huawei Base, Bantian, Longgang,
Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China
Tel: +86-755-28972912
Fax: +86-755-28972935
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Adrian Farrel 
  To: Margaria, Cyril (NSN - DE/Munich) ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] 
  Cc: [email protected] 
  Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 9:20 PM
  Subject: Re: [Pce] I-D Action:draft-bao-pce-pre-configured-routing-00.txt


  Hi Cyril,

  Fine with what you say, but...

  We did consider allowing the PCE to push unsolicited routes to the PCC. We
  decided this was not actually the correct information or processing flow.

  The point is that a "new route" is only available if a new computation is
  performed. But the PCE only performs computations on demand. How would it
  know that the network event should cause it to perform a new computation,
  and how would it know whether the newly computed route was wanted by the
  PCC.

  However a third party tool (for example, the NMS, or the VNTM, depending on
  the scenario) should be able to perform this function that is heavily
  associated with local network and per-LSP policy. In these cases, it is the
  management entity that is requesting path computations as the PCC, and it
  will push those paths to the LER according to policy.

  Of course, the LER could be the PCC and could request the paths, but it is
  less likely to be in control of the necessary triggers. This behavior is
  actually very similar to what you might expect for reoptimization.

  Cheers,
  Adrian

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Margaria, Cyril (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[email protected]>
  To: "Adrian Farrel" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
  <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
  Cc: <[email protected]>
  Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 1:39 PM
  Subject: RE: [Pce] I-D Action:draft-bao-pce-pre-configured-routing-00.txt


  Hi,

  I think the term pre-configured route is a bit misleading, I understand
  the scenario as the PCC ask for 3 routes, the first one will be
  signaled, the 2 other kept in case a failure happens on the first route.

  If I am not misunderstood this can be achieved by using the svec with 3
  time the same endpoints and bandwidth.

  Regarding the indication that a route has changed, the PCE could send a
  PCRep with RRO (not allowed in rfc5440) and ERO containing the new Path,
  but what should be the request id of the PCRep?

  In addition the PCC could also be aware that the route failed and
  request a new Path computation for the failed path.

  In this context I do not see the need to have a new flag in the RP
  object for this use case.


  Best Regards
  Cyril Margaria

  -----Original Message-----
  From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
  ext Adrian Farrel
  Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 1:29 PM
  To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected]
  Subject: Re: [Pce] I-D
  Action:draft-bao-pce-pre-configured-routing-00.txt

  While this is a reasonably well-written draft, I don't see that it adds
  anything to what we already have in the core RFCs.

  In section 4.3 you have...

     There are two options
     for PCE to send pre-configured route as follows:
     PCRep is used to respond route computation result naturally.  If it
     is used to send pre-configured route, a new flag SHOULD be defined to
     indicate the route carried is pre-configured route.

  Two questions:
  1. What is the other option? You only list one option.
  2. Why do you need a flag to indicate that a route is pre-
     configured? Why does the PCC care how the route was
     derived?

  You slighlty answer question 2, in section 5.1 where you say...

     When PCC requests pre-configured route

  ...but why would the PCC ask for a pre-configured route? It just wants a

  route. If there is a policy to be applied by the PCE in selection of the

  route, this should be indicated using the normal policy functions. If
  there
  is an objective function/algorithm to be applied in selecting the route,

  this should be indicated using the OF object.

  So I think that you don't need the pre-configured route flag.

  Cheers,
  Adrian

  _______________________________________________
  Pce mailing list
  [email protected]
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

  _______________________________________________
  Pce mailing list
  [email protected]
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to