Dear Adrian,
The charter update looks fine to me.
Cheers,
Xian
________________________________
发件人: [email protected] [[email protected]] 代表 Adrian Farrel
[[email protected]]
发送时间: 2013年5月6日 18:57
到: [email protected]
主题: Re: [Pce] Proposed updated Charter
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]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
