I am aware of IPR applicable to this draft, and it has already been disclosed
to the IETF.
Thanks,
Mahendra
From:Hariharan Ananthakrishnan
To:draft-ietf-pce-association-divers...@ietf.org
Cc:pce@ietf.org
Date:2019-04-10 08:27:41
Subject:IPR poll on draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity
Hi
I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft that should be disclosed
in accordance with IETF IPR rules.
- Hari
On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 7:57 PM Hariharan Ananthakrishnan
wrote:
> Hi authors,
>
> In preparation for Working Group last call on this draft, I'd like all
> authors and
Dear Stephane Litkowski, Siva Sivabalan, Colby Barth, Mahendra Singh Negi:
An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled Path
Computation Element communication Protocol (PCEP) extension for signaling LSP
diversity constraint (draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity) was
submitted
Hi!
> -Original Message-
> From: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:dhruv.dh...@huawei.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 12:52 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw ; The IESG
> Cc: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; pce-
> cha...@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Pce] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on
Hi Ben,
I think we have converged and I have posted a new version -13.
> > Section 6.1
> > >When reporting the status of a P2MP TE LSP, the destinations MUST
> be
> > >grouped in END-POINTS object based on the operational status (O
> field
> > >in S2LS object) and leaf type (in
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element WG of the IETF.
Title : Path Computation Element (PCE) Protocol Extensions
for Stateful PCE usage for Point-to-Multipoint Traffic
