Dhruv, Thank you very much for the pointer. We have revised the draft using the correct PCE references. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mcd-rtgwg-extension-tn-aware-mobility/
Thanks, Linda From: Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, September 9, 2023 10:09 PM To: Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Regarding PCE in draft-mcd-rtgwg-extension-tn-aware-mobility Hi Linda, We simply reuse the BGP defined flow specifications as it is and don't redefine them for PCEP. Check the table in https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9168.html#section-7 Thus all values specified in https://www.iana.org/assignments/flow-spec/flow-spec.xhtml is available for PCEP as well. Hope this clears up... Let me know if you still need to talk? Thanks! Dhruv Sent from Mobile On Sun, 10 Sep 2023 at 7:51 AM, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Dhruv, RFC9168 specifies Type=256 to filter out a specific Route Distinguisher. But I can't find any Type that can filter out a specific flow, for example, packets with Source UDP port = "value"? Possible to have a zoom call with you to ask you a few more questions? Thank you! Linda From: rtgwg <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 3:31 PM To: RTGWG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Regarding PCE in draft-mcd-rtgwg-extension-tn-aware-mobility Hi, Just to confirm that PCE WG has a PCEP FlowSpec mechanism defined in RFC 9168 - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9168/ that includes a Flow Specification TLV which includes the Flow Specifications defined for use with BGP [RFC8955] [RFC8956] and thus the UDP Source port mapping can be achieved via the PCEP. I suggest authors add reference to RFC 9168 to make that point clear. Thanks! Dhruv
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
