Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-hsd-pce-sr-p2mp-policy-03

Hi WG, Support the WG adoption. One comment: May want to identify the exact IANA registry names in Section 8 that need to be updated. Thanks, Rakesh From: Pce on behalf of Dhruv Dhody Date: Monday, October 18, 2021 at 8:34 AM To: pce@ietf.org Cc: draft-hsd-pce-sr-p2mp-pol...@ietf.org

Re: [Pce] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-12: (with COMMENT)

Thank Martin for the review comments. This was an error text as there is no reporting for tail-end/reverse LSPs on egress nodes. Fixed in the latest (rev 14) version. URL: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-14.txt Diff:

Re: [Pce] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-12: (with COMMENT)

Thank you Murray for the review comments. We have posted a new revision that address the comments: URL: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13.txt Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13 Please see inline

Re: [Pce] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-12: (with COMMENT)

Thank you Benjamin for the review comments. We have posted a new revision that address the comments: URL: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13.txt Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13 Please see inline

Re: [Pce] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-12: (with COMMENT)

Thank you Alvaro for the review comments. We have added a Section 3.5 - Operational Considerations in the new revision to address the comment. URL: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13.txt Diff:

Re: [Pce] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-12: (with COMMENT)

Thank you Eric for the review comments. We have posted a new revision that address the comments: URL: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13.txt Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-13 Please see inline with

Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-09.txt

Happy New Year! Many thanks Harish for the RtgDir review. Please see replies inline with … From: Harish Sitaraman Date: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 at 6:07 PM To: rtg-...@ietf.org Cc: rtg-...@ietf.org , draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir@ietf.org , pce@ietf.org Subject: RtgDir review:

Re: [Pce] Shepherd's Review of draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-08

Thank you Dhruv for the detailed review and comments. Latest revision is uploaded that addresses your review comments: Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-09 Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-09 Please

Re: [Pce] WGLC for draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir

Hi WG, Chairs, I have read the latest version of the document and believe it is ready for publication. Thanks, Rakesh (as a co-author) On 2020-10-05, 1:17 PM, "Dhruv Dhody" wrote: Hi WG, This email starts a working group last call for draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir [1].

Re: [Pce] IPR Poll on draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir

Hi Chairs, WG, I am aware of the IPR applicable to this draft, and it has already been disclosed to the IETF. https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2995/ Thanks, Rakesh From: Hariharan Ananthakrishnan Date: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 at 12:05 AM To: "=SMTP:rgandhi@cisco. com" , Colby Barth ,

Re: [Pce] IPR Poll on draft-li-pce-sr-path-segment-08

Hi Hari, I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft that should be disclosed in accordance with IETF IPR rules. Thanks, Rakesh From: Hariharan Ananthakrishnan Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 10:49 AM To: "chengl...@huawei.com" , "mach.c...@huawei.com" ,

[Pce] Updates to draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir ... Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-03.txt

Hi WG, Chairs, We have updated the draft to incorporate couple of review comments from Marina Fizgeer, namely, 1) Show the direction of LSP from PCC point of view in Fig. 2 and 3 (as opposed to PCE point of view which may be confusing). 2) Clarify PLSP-ID for bidirectional LSP in Section 5.5.

Re: [Pce] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth

Hi Julien, WG, I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication. Thanks, Rakesh (as a co-author). On 2018-12-13, 8:29 AM, "Pce on behalf of Julien Meuric" wrote: Hi all, This e-mail starts a 3-week PCE WG Last Call on

Re: [Pce] IPR Check on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth

Hi Julien, Apart from the disclosure #2996 below, I am not aware of any other IPR that applies to this draft. https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2996/ Thanks, Rakesh > -Original Message- > From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > julien.meu...@orange.com >

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04

Hi Mike, Thank you for your review of the document. Please see inline with … From: "=SMTP:mtaillon@cisco. com" Date: Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 12:52 PM To: "pce@ietf.org" , "draft-barth-pce-association-bi...@ietf.org"

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04

Hi Dhruv, Many thanks for your review and suggestions. Please see inline with … From: Dhruv Dhody Date: Monday, April 16, 2018 at 5:06 AM To: Jonathan Hardwick , "pce@ietf.org" ,

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04

Hi WG, Chairs, Yes/support (as a co-author). Thanks, Rakesh From: Pce on behalf of Jonathan Hardwick Date: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 10:04 AM To: "pce@ietf.org" , "draft-barth-pce-association-bi...@ietf.org"

[Pce] Updated draft-barth-pce-association-bidir-04.txt

Hi WG, FYI: This draft has been updated to align with the latest version of draft-ietf-pce-association-group. The changes mostly editorial in nature. Authors believe the document is ready for WG adoption. Welcome your review comments and suggestions. Thanks, Rakesh (for authors) On

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-ananthakrishnan-pce-stateful-path-protection-05

Hi WG, Chairs, Yes, support. Thanks, Rakesh From: Pce on behalf of Jonathan Hardwick Date: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 7:09 AM To: "pce@ietf.org" , "draft-ananthakrishnan-pce-stateful-path-protect...@ietf.org"

Re: [Pce] Early Code Point Allocation for draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp

Adding Dhruv, most likely Dhruv requested for it. On 2018-03-27, 10:12 AM, "Julien Meuric" wrote: Hi all, As mentioned during our session in London, we have received a request from the authors of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp for an early code

Re: [Pce] WG LC of draft-ietf-pce-association-group

Hi Julien, WG, Yes/support. Very important base document for many other documents for LSP association (such as draft-barth-pce-association-bidir). Thanks, Rakesh On 2018-02-01, 9:09 AM, "Pce on behalf of Julien Meuric" wrote:

Re: [Pce] Adoption Poll for draft-raghu-pce-lsp-control-request

Hi WG, Julien, Yes, Support the adoption of this important draft. Thanks, Rakesh On 2018-01-22, 10:05 AM, "Pce on behalf of Julien Meuric" wrote: Hi all, Back in Prague, draft-raghu-pce-lsp-control-request raised clear

[Pce] Updated draft-barth-pce-association-bidir

HI WG, This draft was presented at the last IETF meeting (in Chicago). The draft has been updated as following: Added text in Sections 1, 3.1 and 3.2 for Fast reroute procedure (using ietf-teas-assoc-corouted-bidir-frr) Added path requests with Stateless PCE Various editorial changes We

Re: [Pce] IPR Disclosure Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth

Hi Loa, Please see inline with . On 2017-05-05, 4:22 AM, "Pce on behalf of Loa Andersson" wrote: Folks, I see no problem progressing this draft, the licensing terms are OK. Great, thanks. However there is another problem.

Re: [Pce] PCE Auto-bandwidth Draft

Thank you Luyuan for providing review comments on the draft-dhody-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth. Adding PCE WG. Thanks again, Rakesh (for authors) From: Luyuan Fang luf...@microsoft.commailto:luf...@microsoft.com Date: Wednesday, 29 July, 2015 8:14 PM To: Rakesh Gandhi

Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-sivabalan-pce-lsp-setup-type-02.txt as a PCE WG Document

Support. Thanks, Rakesh On 2014-09-14 6:06 AM, JP Vasseur (jvasseur) jvass...@cisco.com wrote: Dear WG, We had several discussions showing a good consensus adopting draft-sivabalan-pce-lsp-setup-type-02.txt and this work has considerably progressed in other WG. Are you in favor of adopting

Re: [Pce] Adopting of draft-sivabalan-pce-segment-routing-03.txt as PCE WG Document

Support. Thanks, Rakesh On 2014-09-14 6:06 AM, JP Vasseur (jvasseur) jvass...@cisco.com wrote: Dear WG, We had several discussions showing a good consensus adopting draft-sivabalan-pce-segment-routing-03.txt and this work has considerably progressed in other WG. Are you in favor of adopting