This looks good to me Adrian. Thanks, -ed
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 3:57 AM, Adrian Farrel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi,**** > > ** ** > > I have entered what I believe is your desired new charter text at > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-pce/**** > > ** ** > > The diff is at > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fcharter%2Fcharter-ietf-pce-05.txt&difftype=--hwdiff&submit=Go%21&url2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fcharter%2Fcharter-ietf-pce-05-00.txt > **** > > ** ** > > Looks like the only change is the new work item at the end of the list.*** > * > > ** ** > > Before going to the next stage I need to hear:**** > > - that I have the changes right as intended**** > > - a few voices from the WG saying "Yes, this is what we want."**** > > ** ** > > I realise that the topic has been discussed (possibly to death), but a few > hands raised at this stage will confirm that people really intend to work > on this.**** > > ** ** > > Thanks,**** > > Adrian**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *JP > Vasseur (jvasseur) > *Sent:* 05 May 2013 09:45 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Pce] Proposed updated Charter**** > > ** ** > > Dear all, **** > > ** ** > > We have not received any feedback (positive or negative) about the > proposed text that was discussed for the most part**** > > during the last WG meeting - We will now discuss it with our Area Director. > **** > > ** ** > > Thanks.**** > > ** ** > > JP and Julien.**** > > ** ** > > On Apr 16, 2013, at 3:51 AM, JP Vasseur (jvasseur) wrote:**** > > > ** > ****** > > Dear all, **** > > ** ** > > As discussed in Orlando and according to the consensus in the WG to modify > our charter, please find a proposed text.**** > > ** ** > > Please comment by April 30th.**** > > ** ** > > JP and Julien.**** > > ** ** > > *Description of Working Group***** > > The PCE Working Group is chartered to specify the required protocols so as > to enable a Path Computation Element (PCE)-based architecture for the > computation > of paths for MPLS and GMPLS Point to Point and Point to Multi-point > Traffic Engineered LSPs. **** > > In this architecture path computation does not necessarily occur on the > head-end > (ingress) LSR, but on some other path computation entity that may > physically not be located on each head-end LSR. **** > > The PCE WG works on application of this model within a single domain or > within a group of domains (where a domain is a layer, IGP area or Autonomous > System with limited visibility from the head-end LSR). At this time, > applying this model to large groups of domains such as the Internet is > not thought to be possible, and the PCE WG will not spend energy on that > topic. The WG specifies the PCE communication Protocol (PCEP) and needed > extensions > for communication between LSRs (termed Path Computation Clients - PCCs) > and PCEs, and between cooperating PCEs. Security mechanisms such as > authentication and confidentiality are included. The WG determines > requirements for extensions to existing routing and signaling protocols > in support of the PCE architecture and the signaling of inter-domain > paths (e.g. RSVP-TE and its GMPLS variations). Any necessary extensions > will be produced in collaboration with the Working Groups responsible for > the protocols. The WG also works on the mechanisms to for multi-layer > path computation and PCEP extensions for communication between several > network layers. The WG defines the required PCEP extensions for > Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON) while keeping consistency > with the GMPLS architecture specified in the CCAMP WG. **** > > Work Items: **** > > - PCEP extensions for MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineered LSP path computation > models involving PCE(s). This includes the case of computing the paths of > intra and inter-domain TE LSPs. Such path computation includes the > generation of primary, protection and recovery paths, as well as > computations for (local/global) reoptimization and load balancing. Both > intra- and inter-domain applications are covered. **** > > - In cooperation with protocol specific Working Group (e.g., MPLS, CCAMP), > development of LSP signaling (RSVP-TE) extensions required to support > PCE-based path computation models. **** > > - Specification of PCEP extensions for communication in the various > GMPLS-controlled > networks, including WSON. **** > > - Definition of PCEP extensions for path computation in multi-layer > networks.**** > > - Definition of the PCEP extensions used by a stateful PCE for > recommending a new path for an existing or new LSP to the PCC/PCE. Further > protocol extensions must cover the case where the recommendation is not > followed by the PCC/PCE.**** > > *Goals and Milestones***** > > April 2013 Submit the GMPLS requirements to the IESG to be considered as > an Informational RFC**** > > Sept 2013 Submit PCEP extensions for GMPLS to the IESG to be considered > as a Proposed Standard**** > > Sept 2013 Submit inter-area/AS applicability statement to the IESG as an > Informational RFC**** > > Nov 2013 Adopt PCEP extensions for hierarchical PCE path computation > model as WG document**** > > Jan 2014 Submit the PCEP MIB to the IESG to be considered as a Proposed > Standard**** > > Feb 2014 Submit inter-layer PCEP extensions to the IESG to be considered > as a Proposed Standard**** > > April 2014 Adopt PCEP P2MP MIB as a WG document**** > > April 2014 Submit the PCE Discovery MIB to the IESG to be considered as a > Proposed Standard**** > > April 2014 Submit PCEP P2MP MIB to the IESG to be considered as a > Proposed Standard**** > > TBD: ADD NEW MILESTONES ACCORDING TO THE NEW CHARTER.**** > > Feb 2015 Evaluate WG progress, recharter or close**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > _______________________________________________ > 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
