Hi Samuel, Thanks for the quick response. This looks good to me.
Thanks, Ketan On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 8:29 PM Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Ketan, > > Please let me know if you are fine with attached version. I can submit it > then. > > Regards, > Samuel > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ketan Talaulikar via Datatracker <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 3:04 PM > To: The IESG <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: [Pce] Ketan Talaulikar's Yes on > draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: (with COMMENT) > > Ketan Talaulikar has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for addressing my discuss points/comments and other comments. > Following > are further comments suggested to improve the updated text that was > introduced. > > Provided inline in the idnits format output for the v26 of the document. > > 209 The term "LSP" in this document represents Candidate Path > within an > 210 SR Policy. In the context of SR Policy for SRv6, the term > "LSP" in > 211 this document refers to an SRv6 path, which is represented as a > list > 212 of SRv6 segments. > > <minor> How about? > > CURRENT > In the context of SR Policy for SRv6, the term "LSP" in this document > refers to > an SRv6 path, which is represented as a list of SRv6 segments. > > SUGGEST > In the context of SR Policy for SRv6 (refer [RFC9603]), the term "LSP" in > this > document refers to an SRv6 path, which is represented as a list of SRv6 > segments. > > 249 [RFC8697] specifies the mechanism for the capability > advertisement of > 250 the Association Types supported by a PCEP speaker by defining an > 251 ASSOC-Type-List TLV to be carried within an OPEN object. This > 252 capability exchange for the SR Policy Association Type MUST be > done > 253 before using the SRPA. To that aim, a PCEP speaker MUST > include the > 254 SRPA Type (6) in the ASSOC-Type-List TLV and MUST receive the > same > 255 from the PCEP peer before using the SRPA (Section 6.1). SRPA > MUST be > 256 assigned for all SR Policy LSPs by PCEP speaker originating the > LSP > 257 if capability was advertised by both PCEP speakers. > > <major> What would be the error reported by the PCEP speaker if it were to > received an SR LSP (say using mechanism in RFC8664) without an SRPA even > after > successful capability negotiation? Perhaps there is an existing error that > can > be used? > > 294 SR Policy Candidate Path Identifier uniquely identifies the SR > Policy > 295 Candidate Path within the context of an SR Policy. SR Policy > 296 Candidate Path Identifier is assigned by PCEP peer originating > the > 297 LSP. Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT change their > SR > 298 Policy Candidate Path Identifiers for the lifetime of the PCEP > 299 session. Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT carry > same SR > 300 Policy Candidate Path Identifiers in their SRPAs. If the above > > <minor> How about? > > CURRENT > Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT carry same SR Policy Candidate > Path Identifiers in their SRPAs. > > SUGGEST > Two or more Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT carry same SR > Policy > Candidate Path Identifiers in their SRPAs. > > < EoR v26 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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]
