Hi Adrian and Julien,
Many thanks for your suggestions!
I fully agree with you. The two wg drafts could be viewed as two
implementations to use the flag carried in LSP-EXTENDED-FLAG TLV.
I will add informative references to those two drafts if necessary. And I also
suggest those two drafts could add references to the draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag.
Regards,
Quan
>Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03
Adrian Farrel <[email protected]> Fri, 19 February 2021 16:05 UTCShow header
>Ah, that's useful. Thanks Julien.
>Makes this work more pressing.
>Informative references to those two drafts would help focus the reviewer's
>mind and might be handy when this draft overtakes those other two documents
>and goes to the IESG.
>Cheers,
>Adrian
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: 19 February
2021 14:38
To: [email protected]: [email protected]: Re: [Pce] Adoption of
draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03
>Hi Adrian,
>Thank you for your feedback.
>If evidence is needed, how about binding
>label?https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-binding-label-sid-06#section-11.2Note
> it's also reused
>inhttps://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-sr-path-segment-03#section-4.2Have
> a nice week-end,
>Julien
On 18/02/2021 16:57, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Thanks to the authors for cleaning this up a lot since last time.
>
> I don't object to adoption. Would be nice to have evidence of someone
> needing a bit now, but by the time this becomes an RFC it is reasonably
> possible.
>
> Adrian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pce <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
> Sent: 01 February 2021 17:48
>
> Hi WG,
>
> This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-03>
> This is a small draft that extends the flags in the LSP Objects by
> defining a new LSP-EXTENDED-FLAG TLV. Note that the existing
> sub-registry "LSP Object Flag Field" is almost fully assigned.
>
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#lsp-object-flag-field>
> 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.
>
> Please respond by Monday 15th Feb.
>
> 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>
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
