Hello Team, Below is the section where END-POINTS object usage in PCInitiate message has been mentioned:
Specification: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8281 *5.3 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8281#section-5.3>. LSP Instantiation* For an instantiation request of an RSVP-signaled LSP, the destination address may be needed. The PCC MAY determine it from a provided object (e.g., ERO) or a local decision. Alternatively, the END-POINTS object MAY be included to explicitly convey the destination addresses to be used in the RSVP-TE signaling. The source address MUST be either specified or left for the PCC to choose by setting it to "0.0.0.0" (if the destination is an IPv4 address) or "::" (if the destination is an IPv6 address). Crabbe, et al. Standards Track [Page 10] ------------------------------ RFC 8281 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8281> PCE-Initiated LSPs in Stateful PCE December 2017 The PCE MAY include various attributes as per [RFC5440 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5440>]. The PCC MUST use these values in the LSP instantiation and local values for unspecified parameters. Above highlighted statement mentioned that inclusion of optional object END-POINTS in PCInitiate message explicitly convey the destination addresses to be used in the RSVP-TE signaling. No reference of the P flag is mentioned. So, is it really necessary to set the P flag in the END-POINTS object of PCInitiate Message? Please let me know. Thanks, Mrinmoy
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
