Hi Mike,
Thank you for your review of the document. Please see inline with <RG>… From: "=SMTP:mtaillon@cisco. com" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 12:52 PM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: Jonathan Hardwick <[email protected]>, Ravi Singh <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04 Resent-From: <[email protected]> Resent-To: "=SMTP:rgandhi@cisco. com" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Resent-Date: Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 12:52 PM Hi Support. Comments. (Sorry if already raised — am new to the mailer) 4.2 — please clarify that TLV is indeed optional o If the Bidirectional LSP Association Group TLV is missing, it means the LSP is the forward LSP. — does this imply optional in forward direction only ? <RG> Updated Section 4.2 with additional details. — How is this association used during reporting/delegation ? For single sided, is a single PCRpt used for both directions ? <RG> Updated Section 3.1 with details and added Figures 2A and 2B. -------------- Perhaps out of scope of this document: — For single sided, its not clear how the REVERSE_LSP object is determined. Is this returned via PCEP from the PCE ? <RG> Updated Section 3.1 with details. Revised document can be found at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-01 Welcome any additional review comments and suggestions you may have. Thanks, Rakesh -mike On Apr 13, 2018, at 7:09 PM, Ravi Singh <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Yes/support. Ravi From: Pce [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 7:05 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04 Dear PCE WG This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04 a PCE working group document. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barth-pce-association-bidir/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dbarth-2Dpce-2Dassociation-2Dbidir_&d=DwMFAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=6ArkE4n20mNZQF6JxrMYwJyAGBWWjzhSIC2O3-fXPV4&m=zZvcysHnjvmDB_Wpm9RJVZtjLzUOK_I9es23IsFAuHE&s=R6dZ1JkRnNd2Nrd9OJIjRhLk4Ngkw5jReHfNX8tKFNQ&e=> 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 24. Many thanks, Jon and Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
