Hi Mike,
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-13.html#section-6.2
Can the TBD4 SR-POLICY-CAPABILITY be changed to SRPOLICY-CAPABILITY to
match the naming style for other TLVs?
Thanks!
Dhruv
-- Forwarded message -
From: Dhruv Dhody
Date:
Hi WG,
We received no objections and thus will be going ahead with the early
allocation process.
Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 6:53 PM Dhruv Dhody wrote:
> Hi WG,
>
> We have received a request from the authors of
> draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp for an early code
Hi all,Sorry for being late, I fully support the adoption too. Some small comments for the better understanding:1) Section 4.1 Association parameters1.1) Association ID which should be set to 1, will it never be used and should be kept as '1" ? 1.2) This sentence sounds confusing, IMO:"If the PCC
Hi Dhruv,
There are still a few minor pending comments that I plan to address, so we will
need a version -14.
Thanks,
Mike.
From: Pce On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 11:26 PM
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: pce-chairs ;
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy...@ietf.org
Subject:
