Dear All,
yes/support with comments:

   - since the draft does not discuss actual control of the protection
   switchover but introduces objects related to Path Protection Association
   Group I encourage authors to consider reflecting that in the title of the
   document;
   - Path Protection Association Group, as I understand, defined as 1:N,
   i.e. one working and N protection paths, while M:N is more general case or
   protection. I encourage authors to consider ways to support M:N PPAG;
   - above I've made assumption that the protection mode supported by PPAG
   is 1:N (1:1 is just special case). But PPAG may be used to signal
   association for 1+1 protection scheme. If that is the case, can 1+1 be
   expressed using proposed S and P flags or additional flag is required?

Regards,
Greg

>
>
> *From:* Pce [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan Hardwick
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 27, 2018 13:10
> *To:* [email protected]; draft-ananthakrishnan-pce-
> [email protected]
> *Cc:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-ananthakrishnan-pce-
> stateful-path-protection-05
>
>
>
> Dear PCE WG
>
>
>
> This is the start of a two week poll on making 
> draft-ananthakrishnan-pce-stateful-path-protection-05
> a PCE working group document.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ananthakrishnan-pce-
> stateful-path-protection/
>
>
>
> Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating
> “yes/support” or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your
> reasons.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to
> see addressed once the document is a WG document.
>
>
>
> The poll ends on Tuesday, April 10.
>
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
>
>
> Jon and Julien
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
> ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
> falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
> this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
> modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
>
>
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to