Dear authors, Following the presentation in IETF91, I would like to add several comments below:
o Which track: o Protocol and ability to define domain wide sequence is gaining importance recently, and in particular when applied to the use-cases like • SDN controller · It will have to determine the set of entities and the order of them in forming paths • In SPRING, the sequence can serve as input in source routing o I’m not sure if it’s too late. But I think this draft can be on the standard track. o Section 1 “The Domain-Sequence … out of scope” o I think this should be included as “in-scope”, or defined in a separate document • We can define strict and loose sequence · similar to RSVP EROs, loose or strict · In case of loose, it can be either o Administratively, giving admin/controller power/flexibility • This may include Policy (Similar to RPL/ACL) • And if one wants to go non-conventional paths • Even H-PCE can be considered as in this category, as one has to decide how to partition and arrange the tree o Automated • ABR/ASBR negotiation (capability and dependency) • There are drafts doing “lowest-cost” (similar to IGP’s shortest path) algorithm o Typo: section 7.5 “and signaling message” should be “a signaling message” Regards, -wenhu
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
