Dear authors of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-stateful-pce-gmpls,

Considering the level of change after the shepherd's review of the aforementioned I-D, I've performed a 2nd review. Only some minor issues/nits remain. Please find them below.

- Page 1: s/provides extensions required/provides the extensions required/

- P.4:
    * s/do not cover the GMPLS networks/do not cover GMPLS-controlled networks/

    * OLD:
   The various requirements for stateful GMPLS including PCE-initiation
   for GMPLS LSPs is provided in Section 4. An overview of the PCEP
   extensions are specified...
      NEW:
   The various requirements for stateful GMPLS, including PCE-initiation
   for GMPLS LSPs, are provided in Section 4. An overview of the PCEP
   extensions is specified...

- P.5:
    * s/the LSP delegated to the PCE/the LSPs delegated to the PCE/
    * s/the change of the LSP./the change of the LSPs./
    * s/sent by PCC to PCEs./sent by PCCs to PCEs./
    * s/An LSP Initiate Request (PCInitiate) messages are/An LSP Initiate Request (PCInitiate) message is/
    * s/The PCE-Initiated LSP would follow/PCE-initiated LSPs follow/

- P.6:
    * Knowing that the END-POINT line formatting used to be broken, considering a different character for the 2nd level of bullets may limit the ambiguity in further editions.
    * s/MUST be use to specify/MUST be used to specify/
    * s/and not in this document as well./nor in this document./

- P.10:
    * A title should be added after the figure.
    * s/X bit is defined in [RFC5521]./X bit: Same as the X bit defined in XRO sub-objects by [RFC5521] (i.e. mandatory vs. desired)./

- P.11:
    * OLD:
   If the PCC
   supports the extensions as per this document (understands the U flag
   that indicates the stateful LSP-UPDATE-CAPABILITY) but did not...
      NEW:
   If the PCC understands the U flag
   that indicates the stateful LSP-UPDATE-CAPABILITY but did not...

    * OLD:
   If the PCE supports the extensions as per this document (understands
   the R flag that indicates the stateful LSP-REPORT-CAPABILITY) but
   did not...
      NEW:
   If the PCE understands the R flag that indicates the stateful
   LSP-REPORT-CAPABILITY but did not...

- P.12:
    * OLD:
   If the PCC
   supports the extensions as per this document (understands the I flag
   that indicates LSP-INSTANTIATION-CAPABILITY) but did not...
      NEW:
   If the PCC understands the I flag
   that indicates LSP-INSTANTIATION-CAPABILITY but did not...

    * OLD:
   A stateful PCE performs the re-optimization when the R bit is set in
   RP object.
      NEW:
   A stateful PCE is expected to perform an LSP re-optimization when
   receiving a message with the R bit set in the RP object.

- P.13:
    * s/the receiving PCE or PCC would send/the receiving PCE or PCC MUST send/


Regards,

Julien


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

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

Reply via email to