Jari Arkko has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-service-aware-12: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-service-aware/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The document should probably say more about how frequently information can be updated and recomputation can occur; there's a possibility that too frequent adjustment creates a flip flop effect where traffic moves to a new path, performance degrades, etc. I was curious about the definition of the P2MP packet loss as being the highest among the individual path losses. Is there some basis in some measurement documents for instance for this definition? It would seem to me that other definitions would also be possible, e.g., ones that take the aggregate loss into account in some fashion. _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
