Hello, Proposing some clarification and an extension to the local protection bit signalled in PCEP. This is to signal more options on PCE for selecting protected/unprotected resources, mainly in the context of Segment Routing.
Any feedback is appreciated, Thank you Andrew On 2019-10-25, 11:02 AM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: A new version of I-D, draft-stone-pce-path-protection-enforcement-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Andrew Stone and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-stone-pce-path-protection-enforcement Revision: 00 Title: Path Protection Enforcement in PCEP Document date: 2019-10-25 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 7 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stone-pce-path-protection-enforcement-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-stone-pce-path-protection-enforcement/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-stone-pce-path-protection-enforcement-00 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-stone-pce-path-protection-enforcement Abstract: This document aims to clarify existing usage of the local protection desired bit signalled in Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP). This document also introduces a new flag for signalling protection strictness in PCEP. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
