Hi WG, Haomian and I discussed this offline and came up with this guideline, that should covers all the cases -
Error and Notification handling as per [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] should be considered in PCE documents that include new errors and notifications. A requirement for the authors of these drafts is to evaluate the applicability of the procedure in [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] and provide details about the "Error-criticality" TLV and "Propagation" TLV for errors and notifications defined in the draft. Examples of this can be found in section 5.4.3 of [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors]. Thoughts? Dhruv On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 7:26 PM Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, Dhruv, WG, > > Thank you for the updating, please find my slight 'addition' as follow: > > Error and Notification handling as per [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] should > be considered in PCE documents that include multi-PCE interactions. [Dhruv]: Any new error / notifications definition should include the recommended values for "Error-criticality" TLV and "Propagation" TLV. So instead of "multi-PCE" interaction, better to say "new errors and notifications". > A requirement for the editors of these drafts is to evaluate the > applicability of the procedure in [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] and make a > statement on whether new error types need to be extended. [Dhruv]:removed 'make a statement....' >If yes, it is also requested to provide details about the "Error-criticality" >TLV and "Propagation" TLV for errors and notifications defined in the draft. >Examples of this can be found in section 5.4.3 of >[I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors]. > > BTW, I have no problem on the criteria on whether to put the > [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] as a normative reference or information > reference, as the error handling in 'Mature' drafts has already been included > in the latest version of [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors]. > > Best wishes, > Haomian > > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:[email protected]] > 发送时间: 2019年6月7日 19:16 > 收件人: Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept) > <[email protected]> > 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected] > 主题: Re: [Pce] 答复: PCEP Enhanced Errors > > Hi Haomian, WG, > > Note that, this guideline should be for any 'future' draft, since this update > would have to use [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] as a normative reference (as > they will be providing details of Error-criticality and Propagation etc). > For any 'mature' draft it is better to use [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] as > informative reference with details of error handling added into > [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] itself (as already done for some drafts). > > Thus my suggestion would be to say - > > Error and Notification handling as per [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] should > be considered in PCE documents that include multi-PCE interactions. A > requirement for the editors of these drafts is to evaluate the applicability > of the procedure in [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors] and provide details about > the "Error-criticality" TLV and "Propagation" TLV for errors and > notifications defined in the draft. Examples of this can be found in section > 5.4.3 of [I-D.ietf-pce-enhanced-errors]. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks! > Dhruv > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 3:38 PM Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology > Research Dept) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, Dhruv, WG, > > > > I think the following text would be helpful as the guideline. > > > > ------ guideline text starts --------- Error handling should be > > considered in any multi-PCE drafts. A requirement for the editors of these > > drafts is to evaluate what error types between PCE may occur in the > > specified scenarios in the draft and whether new error types need to be > > extended. It is also requested to check the applicability of the procedures > > specified in draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors to both the existing and the > > extending error types. For PCE protocol extension who gives new error > > types, it is requested to provide description on the applicability of > > "Propagation" TLV and "Error-criticality" TLV. > > ------ guideline text ends --------- > > > > Any comments or rephrasing would be more than welcome, thank you. > > > > Best wishes, > > Haomian > > -----邮件原件----- > > 发件人: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:[email protected]] > > 发送时间: 2019年6月3日 13:28 > > 收件人: Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical Technology Research Dept) > > <[email protected]> > > 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected] > > 主题: Re: [Pce] 答复: PCEP Enhanced Errors > > > > Hi Haomian, > > > > Lets come up with the guidelines (and get the agreement on the mailing > > list) first! > > Then, lets take one of the I-D as example and work with the authors to > > incorporate the guidelines. > > > > We can worry about how to add guidelines to the wiki later. We can also add > > the guidelines in your draft itself. > > > > Thanks! > > Dhruv > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:20 AM Zhenghaomian (Zhenghaomian, Optical > > Technology Research Dept) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Adrian, WGs, > > > > > > Thank you for bringing the issue to the list, I think we agreed the > > > direction you mentioned 'no haste but keep moving' in Prague. We would > > > definitely like to provide some text as guideline for other documents, > > > either in the draft or on the wiki page, or both. Personally I need to > > > understand the context in the wiki page before doing that. Do the chairs > > > want to see a separate paragraph talking about the error handling? Or we > > > put the text together with other sections like 'implement policy'? > > > > > > We can move on providing text once we can agree on how to manage, thank > > > you. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > Haomian (as one of the co-authors) > > > > > > -----邮件原件----- > > > 发件人: Pce [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Adrian Farrel > > > 发送时间: 2019年5月31日 23:25 > > > 收件人: [email protected] > > > 主题: [Pce] PCEP Enhanced Errors > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > In Prague we had a discussion of draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors. > > > > > > My recollection is that we decided that there was no great hurry to push > > > this document to completion, but that we didn't want to abandon it. > > > > > > Checking back with the minutes, there was an objective that we encourage > > > authors of other documents to adhere to the error behaviours described in > > > this document. We do this possibly by putting text on a wiki page, but > > > first by discussing the guidelines on the mailing list. Looks like we > > > were particularly interested in the behaviours when there are multiple > > > PCEs present. > > > > > > We also discussed the possibilities for encouraging an "Error Handling" > > > section in all our drafts, or at least for a section on "Error Handling > > > in Multi-PCE Scenarios" when applicable. > > > > > > Would the authors of draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors like to take the lead > > > on this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Adrian > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Pce mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Pce mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
