I believe the issue the draft is tackling is useful and I support adoption. I also believe the idea of "enforcing" a constraint can be generalized (e.g. to other constraints). Ideally, we can consider an approach that can be extended to other constraints in future too.
Regards, Tarek On 10/21/20, 5:14 PM, "Pce on behalf of Stone, Andrew (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hello, As co-author, I support the adoption. Document describes various use case needs, has implementations, and has been updated based on existing feedback. Would be good to have adopted to move to early IANA codepoint allocations to allow implementation to progress further, as well as further WG refinement. Thank you Andrew On 2020-10-21, 9:41 AM, "Pce on behalf of Dhruv Dhody" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hi WG, This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-stone-pce-local-protection-enforcement-02. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-stone-pce-local-protection-enforcement-02 Should this draft be adopted by the PCE WG? Please state your reasons - Why / Why not? What needs to be fixed before or after adoption? Are you willing to work on this draft? Review comments should be posted to the list. This adoption poll will end on 9th Nov 2020 (Monday). Thanks! Dhruv & Julien _______________________________________________ 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
