Re: [Pce] [IANA #1241047] Protocol Action: 'IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in PCE discovery' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-13.txt)

Hi, It looks OK to me. Thanks! -- “Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno” Dr Diego R. Lopez Telefonica I+D https://www.linkedin.com/dr2lopez/ e-mail: diego.r.lo...@telefonica.com Mobile: +34 682 051 091 - On 21/10/22,

Re: [Pce] [IANA #1241047] Protocol Action: 'IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in PCE discovery' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-13.txt)

This looks good to me though I'll defer final approval to the authors. Thanks, Acee On 10/21/22, 1:38 PM, "Sabrina Tanamal via RT" wrote: Dear Authors: ATTENTION: A RESPONSE TO THIS MESSAGE IS NEEDED We've completed the registry actions for the following RFC-to-be:

[Pce] Datatracker State Update Notice:

IANA action state changed to "Waiting on Authors" Datatracker URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support/ ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

[Pce] [IANA #1241047] Protocol Action: 'IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in PCE discovery' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-13.txt)

Dear Authors: ATTENTION: A RESPONSE TO THIS MESSAGE IS NEEDED We've completed the registry actions for the following RFC-to-be: draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-13 ACTION 1: We've moved the following registry to the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Parameters grouping at

Re: [Pce] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-pce-lsp-extended-flags-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Dhruv, The counterpoint is that if tradition was enough to forbid us from adopting small improvements, there’d be a lot less progress. But it’s not a big deal, we can leave it to the discretion of the WG and authors. Regardless, a new version is needed to address Lars’s DISCUSS — I think