Re: [Pce] Can we make a non-backwards compatible change to draft-ietf-pce-lsp-setup-type?

Very much OK with that. Thanks a lot. Regards, Mahendra (Huawei Tech India Pvt. Ltd.) From:Jonathan Hardwick To:Mahendra Singh Negi,adrian,'Julien Meuric',pce,Dhruv Dhody, Cc:draft-ietf-pce-lsp-setup-type,draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing, Date:2017-07-25 20:36:04 Subject:RE: [Pce] Can we make a

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

I think there are much misunderstanding on what PCEP-LS is. Adrian pointed out an accurate assessment of what PCEP-LS is doing with TE information: >> In this network, the question to address is "How does the PCE learn the >> topology of the TE network?" I believe that at least some of the

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

++1 Cheers, Jeff From: Pce on behalf of Cyril Margaria Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 12:25 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane DTF/DERX Cc: "pce@ietf.org" , "pce-cha...@ietf.org"

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

+1, PCEP is rather efficient at dealing with paths and constraints. PCE-CC , as someone mentioned earlier, can be seen as 1-hop LSPs, there could be minimum protocol extensions. PCEP-LS is redoing links-state flooding over PCEP, using the same elements as existing protocols. This sounds OK as an

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

PCEP-LS looks to me like an experiment. For IP, the value proposition of PCEP-LS compared to e.g. BGP-LS is unclear to me. For optical nodes, I think an NMS or controller can deal with this without requiring PCEP-LS, e.g., using NETCONF. For communication between controllers, typical use

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

Hi Dhruv , Never said to stop work on PCEP, but in the mail below the intention is to extend protocol in order to be capable to replace other protocol that already deal with specific functionality. The example for ACTN, can be applied as well for functionality like flooding and signaling

Re: [Pce] 答复: PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

On 25/07/17 03:58, Zhenghaomian wrote: > The point I would like to raise is how to deal with PCEP with other > protocols. Currently it seems that there is some competition with BGP in > link state (both binary but Optical/MW CANNOT run BGP), and also with > Netconf/RESTconf on device configuration

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

Hi Sergio, We also have a PCE WG document which describes the use of PCEP in ACTN - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-applicability-actn/. Yes, ACTN solution via Yang models is perfectly valid. But that should not be a reason, to stop work on PCEP IMHO. Regards, Dhruv On Tue, Jul

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

Stephanie, You said that there are better ways to extract topologies and configure things than using PCEP. You forgot to mention the issue of collecting telemetry and I hope you are not suggesting using PCEP for that. In fact, it is widely accepted that the best way to go about the telemetry

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

Hi Jon, all Looking at the mail below, it seems as though you derive needs to extend PCEP , from the fact PCEP can be consider as having a root role in ACTN context. Well, while ACTN does not mandate any protocol specific in his architecture, the basic toolset to operate ACTN architecture is

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

I think it is all slightly a distraction :-) It is possible to run an MCN without a routing protocol depending on the topology of the MCN. Many MCNs can be achieved with relatively simple static routes. Statements (Haomian) that optical devices cannot run BGP-LS seem to me to be an

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

HI Julien, your correction is…correct  You’re referring to the protocols running on the DCN, or more appropriately on the MCN, right? The IGP is usually non TE and just providing reachability info…but as PCEP can be modified for other purposes, they can be modified as well. On this I agree

Re: [Pce] PCEP as an SDN controller protocol?

Hi Daniele, [Operator hat on.] I agree on several things you wrote, starting from the answer to Jon's rhetorical question, which cares more about how much (at least I've never noticed my co-chair has a short memory). Nevertheless the sentence below