Hi, All:
I have review the document and has the following comments: Although I think the document has already defined the related extension for the information exchange between PCE and PCC, It’s bit harder for the reader to get the reason behind this. 1. For example, in the introduction part, one sentence say: “While this information is available on the PCE, there is no method of conveying this information to the headend router. “ >From my POV, the headend router can get such information from the IGP >protocol, why it is necessary to get such information from the PCE? 2. And again, it says: ”In addition, in the case of multiple (redundant) PCEs, when the headend receives a path from the primary PCE, it needs to be able to report the complete path information - including the SR-Algorithm - to the backup PCE so that in HA scenarios” >From my POV, why the multiple(redundant)PCEs can’t exchange such information >themselves? 3. And, for the following rest part of introduction section, there is no clear logic for the newly extended TLV and their purposes, or the remaining part doesn’t cover all the extensions that described in the following sections. 4. And finally, I am wondering is there any other TLV/Sub-TLV that needs to be synchronized between the PCE/PCC to make the final optimal path can be calculated in each of them? The draft just enumerate them, but doesn’t’ explain whether it covers all of them. Then, I suggest the authors revisit the introduction part of this document, and rewrite it to assure the reader the necessary of this document, and also its enough coverage. Maybe I miss something, if so, please forgive me. Best Regards Aijun Wang China Telecom 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Dhruv Dhody 发送时间: 2024年12月6日 3:02 收件人: [email protected] 抄送: pce-chairs <[email protected]>; [email protected] 主题: [Pce] WGLC for draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-15 Hi WG, This email starts a 3-weeks working group last call for draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-15. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo/ Please 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 Friday 27 Dec 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]
