Hi Dhruv and WG, I read the latest version of draft. Indeed It adds more flexibility to provide vendor-specific information for PCEs using different messages. I support the further work on this draft. But I would like to see the following clarifications:
1) The draft says : "Multiple instances of the object MAY be used on a single PCRpt message.". Does it mean the addition of different Vendor Information objects (with different Enterprise numbers) per each PCEP object in PCRpt ? If I got it correct. if we have big/huge amount of LSPs in that PCRpt message, will we have Vendor Information Object per each object per each LSP? 2) RFC 7470 has section 6.6 Impact on Network Operation which says: " On the other hand, the presence of additional vendor-specific information in PCEP messages may congest the operation of the protocol especially if the PCE does not support the information supplied by the PCC. ". I would like to see some analysis in the draft about potential impact of increasing the amount of Vendor Information objects on network operations too. IMO similar section as in RFC 7470 is needed. 3) RFC 7470 also says: "Enterprise Numbers are assigned by IANA and managed through an IANA registry ". But they are absent so far (at least here: https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml ). How can customers which develop their own PCEs or open source PCEs can know the details of that vendor specific information into Vendor Information objects to consider that in their path calculation algos? Will vendors disclose it somehow as their good will or it will be just sort of black box approach? Thank you in advance. SY, Boris On Thursday, July 4, 2024 at 04:18:29 PM GMT+3, Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> wrote: Hi WG,This email starts a 2-weeks working group last call for draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-03.https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-03.htmlPlease indicate your support or concern for this draft. If you are opposed to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version and it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.The WG LC will end on Thursday 18 July 2024.A general reminder to the WG to be more vocal during the last-call/adoption.Thanks,Dhruv & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
