Hi Cyril, Ramana, I agree with this, during returning delegation – On the receiving side, we ignore the content. On the sending side, we put empty ERO object with no subobject.
The same principle is also applicable to the admin down as per my mail earlier: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pce/current/msg04000.html It should also to be noted that this is applicable to PCRpt message as well where in some case we would not have the ERO object (for ex. Delegation of just configured, not-signaled LSP ; admin down of LSP etc). In these cases as well - On the receiving side, we ignore the content. On the sending side, we put empty ERO object with no subobject. Thus, apart for cyril’s suggested text, we can add generic text in PCRpt/PcUpd message section (6.1, 6.2) - In case of an LSP that is not yet signaled or administratively/ operationally down on receiving such status via PCRpt message the content of ERO object is ignored at PCE, while the PCC SHOULD send an empty ERO object with no sub-objects in PCRpt message. In case of an LSP that is administratively down or returning of delegation via PCUpd message the content of ERO object is ignored at PCC, while the PCE SHOULD send an empty ERO object with no sub-objects in PCUpd message. What does the WG think about this? Regards, Dhruv From: Pce [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cyril Margaria Sent: 10 October 2014 00:34 To: Ramana Yarlagadda Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Pce] NULL PCUpdate message Hi, From the definition, an empty PCUpd must contain an ERO, I think the question boils down to having an empty ERO or an ERO that mirrors the last ERO received. This is the only required parameter. I would propose the following text to clarify: Section 5.5.3: Add: Upon reception of a PCUpd with D=0 a PCC MUST ignore the LSP object A bit and the ERO object content. With that the Empty (I would not introduce a NULL message) PCUpd contains SRP, LSP with PLSP-ID, all flags to 0, and an empty ERO. Br Cyril On 9 October 2014 14:33, Ramana Yarlagadda <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi All, I have a questions on sending the PCUpdate message to delegate an LSP from PCE to PCC. Can somebody please help me here to understand the PCUpdate message For delegating an LSP back to PCC. Re-delegation section talks about empty message but the PCUpdate request message definition Says that all LSP parameters muse be sent. 1. PCE requires to send an EMPTY LSP Update message to delegate an LSP back to PCC. What is an acceptable empty LSP message? Please refer to section 5.5.5 of draft “PCEP extensions for stateful PCE” for procedure of returning Delegation 2. Section 6.2 of draft “PCEP extensions for stateful PCE” defines the PCUpd message. · Three mandatory objects must be included in each PCUpd message. The error codes Are defined to notify the sender if any of the mandatory objects missing in the PCUpdate Message. · Also, The draft says (copied text from section 6.2) · “An LSP Update Request MUST contain all LSP parameters that a PCE wishes to be set for the LSP. A PCC MAY set missing parameters from locally configured defaults. If the LSP specified in the Update Request is already up, it will be re-signaled. A clear definition of NULL message would help us here. -thanks in advance -ramana _______________________________________________ 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
