Hi Andrew, Authors,

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 8:08 AM Andrew Stone (Nokia) <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi PCE WG,
>
> Read the document and support adoption. The document is clear and
> relatively straight forward to follow and the use case does fill a hole
> within the stateful toolset.
>
> One non-blocking question:
>
> - In version 16, section 5.1, the final sentence is "This information can
> be used in Stateful PCEP messages as well" - it's not clear to me what this
> sentence is trying to be describe. The base reference in RFC7470 section
> 6.1 essentially just indicates to provide config knobs. What is meant by
> "THIS" information can be "used" in stateful pcep messages "as well"?
>
>
Good point. I also dont see it adding any value too. How about this change
-

OLD:

5.1.  Control of Function and Policy

   As stated in [RFC7470], this capability, the associated vendor-
   specific information, and policy SHOULD be made configurable.  This
   information can be used in Stateful PCEP messages as well.

NEW:

5.1.  Control of Function and Policy

   The requirements for control of function and policy for vendor-specific
   information as set out in [RFC7470] continues to apply to Stateful PCEP
   extensions specified in this document.

END

Thanks!
Dhruv (no-hats)

Thanks
> Andrew
>
>
>
> On 2023-06-20, 3:46 AM, "Pce on behalf of [email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected] <mailto:
> [email protected]> on behalf of [email protected] <mailto:
> [email protected]>> wrote:
>
> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking
> links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional
> information.
>
> Hi all,
>
> It has been a while since draft-dhody-pce-stateful-pce-vendor started to
> document how to extend the scope of RFC 7470. It is now time to consider
> its adoption by the WG.
> Do you think draft-dhody-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-16 [1] is ready to
> become a PCE work item? Please express your support and/or concerns
> using the mailing list.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dhruv & Julien
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhody-pce-stateful-pce-vendor <
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhody-pce-stateful-pce-vendor>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 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] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce <
> 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

Reply via email to