Hello Mustapha, On 09/08/2016 11:59 PM, Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA) wrote: > The NO-PATH object could indeed be used as is in RFC 5440 in the PCUpd > message with the NI field set to 0 (“No path satisfying the set of > constraints could be found”). This may be useful for the user to debug > the situation from the router without logging in into the PCE. I am OK > if this is added an optional object in addition to the empty ERO and can > be used to send more information about the lack of a path in the PCUpd > message.
I think this is a good idea. I would suggest specifying this in a separate document with its own capability negotiation, just like the state synchronization optimizations are. Bye, Robert
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
