Hi Meral,
I'm not sure that you are applying the term "optimization" consistently.
BRPC optimizes the placement of a single end-to-end LSP that crosses
multiple domains. GCO optimizes a "network", that is a set of LSPs within a
single domain.
But, anyway, if you think some form of cross-reference would be valuable,
can you please suggest some text to the GCO authors for inclusion in their
I-D.
Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Meral Shirazipour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "JP Vasseur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Pce]
Adoptingdraft-lee-pce-global-concurrent-optimization-04.txt as a WG document
?
Hi,
Thank you for the answer. But I still think any optimization application
draft
should refer to the others, even if it is only one sentence to say that
there
are no dependencies. Also, since each optimization application draft will
probably propose similar extensions to PCEP, it would be better, at least
from
an implementation point of view, to generalize these extensions instead of
making them application specific.
Cordially,
Meral
Selon JP Vasseur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi Meral,
On Jun 11, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Meral Shirazipour wrote:
> Hi,
> I would support this draft based on its content, but I only see one
> problem: it
> does not consider or even refer to draft-ietf-pce-brpc-04.txt (or
> maybe I
> missed it?).
> I would rather see a single draft covering all possible optimization
> scenarios/solutions based on the PCE architecture.
>
BRPC is a multi-PCE path computation technique used to compute a
shortest constrained
inter-domain path wheres this ID specifies a (preferably) NMS based
technique where a
set of path computation requests are bundled and send to a PCE with
the objective of
"optimizing" the set of computed paths.
> Having several IDs for optimization applications is ok as long as
> they refer to
> each other and maybe provide an <inter-working> section between the
> different
> methods.
There is no real reason for referring to each other since there is no
dependency.
Thanks.
JP.
>
> Cordially,
> Meral
>
>
>
> Selon JP Vasseur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Dear WG,
>>
>> Do you support the adoption of draft-lee-pce-global-concurrent-
>> optimization-04.txt as a Working Group document ?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> JP.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pce mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
