Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app-06.txt Reviewer: Tomonori Takeda Review Date: September 9th, 2016 IETF LC End Date: Not known Intended Status: Informational Summary: I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be resolved before publication. Comments: This document describes applicability of a stateful PCE, as well as general considerations for deployment. The document is well organized and easy to read. However, there are some minor points which I think should be clarified for completeness and easiness to ready. Major Issues: None Minor Issues: 1) In page 5, section 4.1, multi-PCE deployments are described. It says, "Regardless of the reason for multiple PCEs, an LSP is only delegated to one of the PCEs at any given point in time." Is this described/defined in some other document, or in this document? In the first case, please indicate a reference. In the latter case, I would like to see more clarification and reasoning. 2) In page 12, section 5.1.4, predictability is described as an application. It says "A stateful PCE can solve this through control over LSP ordering.", but I am not sure how stateful PCE solves this scenario. Is it possible even if computation requests come in a time series? Or is it assumed that a stateful PCE is used in such a way that computation requests do not come in a time series? (For example, in a failure scenario, LSP re-computation is not triggered by PCC requesting path computation, but by link failure?) Nits: None Thanks, Tomonori Takeda _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
