On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Julien Meuric wrote: > Oscar (and others), > > Your point is not clear to me. On the one hand, I understand you support > having some work on stateful PCE, hence adding it to our charter. On the > other hand, the current question is *not* on a charter update, but on > adopting a particular I-D as a PCE WG document. > Therefore, could elaborate on where you are standing? "Interesting solution, > suited for some specific cases" or "by no means the basis of the stateful > PCE"? > > Moreover, be aware that tackling stateful PCE does not imply addressing the > full stateful PCE problem space. Note that the proposed draft comes with a > contained scope. Trying to widen our charter too much (e.g. Ramon mentioning > "no signaling") is likely to face strong reluctance from the IESG. >
I was about to comment along the exact same line. The question is indeed whether or not the WG supports the adoption of this ID as a WG, which of course implies that it is already part out of charter. The question of re-chartering is a different question that we could discuss during the PCE WG session in Paris. Thanks. JP. > Cheers, > > Julien > > > Le 08/02/2012 11:47, Oscar González de Dios a écrit : >> Hi all PCErs, >> >> I also support the work in draft-crabbe-pce-stateful-pce-02 and >> share the main concerns. Although I do support the work, I think we should >> start scoping the stateful PCE, looking at the architecture, application >> scenarios and use cases from a broad perspective, with many inputs from >> service providers, vendors and data center users (which are having more and >> more network needs). This draft is a very particular interesting solution, >> suited for some specific cases, but by no means the basis of the stateful >> PCE. Furthermore, it looks weird to have a WG stateful PCE document without >> being the stateful PCE in the charter. >> >> Thus, if everybody thinks that PCE is mature enough to start >> entering into more complex stuff, let's start building the basis of the >> stateful PCE. And then, have solutions for the different environments/use >> cases. >> >> 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 >> > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
