Dear authors of draft-crabbe-pce-stateful-pce-01, please find bellow my
comments and questions on the draft,
First of all, thanks for the valuable work on the stateful PCE topic and
raising the discussions.
Regarding delegation. What happens if the PCE-PCC connection is lost / closed?
Do we have to assume that delegation is only possible with persistent
connections? Do we assume that if connection is lost all delegations are
revoked?
Also, regarding delegation, can you elaborate more on what can and what cannot
be done in the PCE when a LSP is delegated?
In the case or restoration, if the PCC had delegated the LSP, who is
responsible for starting the re-routing? Will the PCE be aware of the failed
element, and then proactively compute an alternative path, and proactively
inform the PCC that it needs to update the path of the LSP?
Regarding LSP information in the PCE, same issue . What happens if the PCE-PCC
connection is lost / closed? Is the LSP info deleted after some time of not
receiving news?
Section 7.2 LSP-ID is local to the PCE-PCC session. If you use multiple PCEs,
the LSP Object would only work in the correct PCE. Can the IDs overlap between
different PCE-PCC sessions? Or must they be different?
Section 5.5.4 Redundant PCEs: You put the focus on the delegation. However, in
case of redundant PCE, I would rather imaging the second PCE having a replica
of the primary PCE. But, looking at the draft, it looks that in case of
changing PCE, the second one will have to learn everything regarding state from
scratch. That may imply that the second PCE will take some time to be fully
operative...
Thus, correct me if I am wrong, seems that the state has only sense in a given
PCE-PCC session. True?
Regarding the use cases, please considerer also another suggestion: LSP groups.
When a LSP is created, it is typically associated to a group of circuits with
whom some specific common behavior is needed. One example is to maintain a
group of LSPs that you want to keep disjoint as much as possible. Currently,
you can request a SVEC computation or add a list of exclusions, but you need to
include all the details from the PCC. Having the state of each LSP in the PCE
would simply this kind of operation. Moreover, in any later changes to the LSP,
or in the event of restoration, if the group of LSPs has suffered
modifications, in the case of the stateful PCE, it is straightforward to keep
track of the changes. Otherwise, the PCC must keep track of them.
Best Regards,
Óscar
________________________________
Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar
nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace
situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and
receive email on the basis of the terms set out at.
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
