Hi, WG,

I have been working on this document for a few iterations. Generally speaking I 
think this is not a typical PCEP work, because it is not focusing providing 
path computation characteristics, but some communication mechanisms among PCEs. 
It won’t be applicable for single PCE scenario. The TLVs extended in this 
document, propagation TLV and criticality TLV, are used to describe the rule 
for a single PCE when handling the error.

My personal opinion is, this work will be useful when multiple PCEs (especially 
from different vendors) need to negotiate how to do the error handling, for 
example in inter-layer or H-PCE cases. With more and more PCE developed and 
deployed in the network, the mechanism defined in this document will eventually 
be needed, but it may take some time.

Thank you.

Best wishes,
Haomian (editor)

发件人: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2021年5月4日 1:39
收件人: [email protected]
抄送: [email protected]
主题: Feedback on draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors

Hi WG,

The WG I-D draft-ietf-pce-enhanced-errors enhances the error and notification 
handling in PCEP. It is one of the older I-Ds that has changed editorship 
multiple times.

We do not see the enhanced mechanism specified in this I-D being utilized by 
any other document yet. We would like to understand if there is still interest 
in publishing this as an RFC. Could you also state your reasoning? Please 
provide your feedback by Monday, 17th May.

Thanks!
PCE Chairs
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to