Hi PCErs,
I have a few comments on the document:
Section 1.1 : Strange indentation
indentation:
============
The indentation of the following section is not consistent:
Section 1.1
Section 2.1
Section 2.1.1
Section 3.1
Section 3.2
...
Section 2.1.1
=============
Is there a requierement for RWA-capable PCE discovery?
IGP-based discovery is addressed in section 3.5, but OPEN extension could
also be covered.
A PCC expecting RWA-capable PCE will only be able to detect a non RWA
capable upon request.
It is likely that request are not very frequent in WSON networks, so a
misconfiguration may be discovered quite late.
OPEN extension would allow a faster detection.
Req 2) : I believe ii) is not only for D-RWA, but also covers RWA.
OLD:
(i) Explicit Label Control (ELC) [RFC4003]
(ii) Non-Explicit labels in the form of Label Sets (This will
allow Distributed WA at a node level where each node would
select the wavelength from the Label Sets)
NEW:
(i) Explicit Label Control (ELC) [RFC4003].
(ii) Non-Explicit labels in the form of Label Sets. The PCC can select
the label based on local policy.
Note that option ii) may also be used in R+WA or DWA.
Section 2.1.2
=============
Is it possible to mix in a bulk request, R and RWA requests?
Section 2.1.4
=============
OLD
For any PCReq Message that is associated with a request for
wavelength assignment the requester (PCC) MUST be able to specify a
restriction on the wavelengths to be used.
NEW
For a RWA request, the request MUST be able to specify an option for
a restriction on the wavelengths to be used.
The requester MAY use this option to restrict the assigned wavelenght for
Explict Label or Label Sets.
--
This is more in line with the rest of the document. The req being on the
protocol, not involving the PCC is better.
OLD
Note that the requestor (PCC) is NOT required to furnish any range
restrictions. This restriction is to be interpreted by the PCE as a
constraint on the tuning ability of the origination laser
transmitter.
NEW
Note that the requestor is NOT required to furnish any range
restrictions. This restriction may for example come from the tuning
ability of a laser transmitter, any optical element, or an policy based
restriction.
--
The PCE should not interpret the restriction, just apply it.
Section 2.1.5
=============
in "The PCReq Message May include specific operator's policy", do you mean
MAY?
The section could be renamed "Wavelength assignement policy constraints"
The explicit label versus Label set could also fit in this section, or
section 2.1.1 req 2 should refer to this section.
OLD
The PCReq Message SHOULD be able to request, when requesting a 1+1
connection (e.g. link disjoint paths), that both paths use the same
wavelength.
NEW
A request for 2 or more path MUST be able to specify an option
constraining the path to have the same wavelength(s) assigned.
--
Computing a 1+1 path is one use case, but this may apply for other
protection type. This can be achieved by removing the protection aspect.
Section 2.1.6
=============
NEW
o OIC list
--
draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-21 defines the concept of OIC, PCEP should be
able to transport the same kind of info
Best regards,
Cyril
On 18 February 2014 17:28, Julien Meuric <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> This last call has ended. We have not seen many reviews. The chairs' will
> come soon.
>
> JP & Julien
>
>
> Feb. 03, 2014 - Julien Meuric:
>
> Hi all.
>>
>> Since many of you are going to dedicate some time to IETF matters over
>> the upcoming days, here comes some homework.
>>
>> This message ignites a 2-week WG last call on
>> draft-ietf-pce-wson-routing-wavelength-10.
>> It will end on Monday, February 17, 11:59 PM (UTC-12).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> JP & Julien
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
