Dear PCE, Following our presentation in Bangkok, https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/materials/slides-103-pce-23-binding-segment-00.pdf
The authors would like to ask the WG the following: (1) Do we link the Binding SID to the PCEP SR capability? Currently we can assign BSID for RSVP-TE LSP as well. (2) Is WG happy with TE-PATH-BINDING TLV format? 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Binding Type (BT) | Binding Value | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ Binding Value (continued) (variable length) ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 2: TE-PATH-BINDING TLV (3) Is there a use case for binding value as “index” in SRGB/SRLB? Thanks! Cheers, Jeff
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
