Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Adrian Farrel]

Ack.

Thanks.

A

From: Jonathan Hardwick [mailto:jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com]
Sent: 06 March 2018 11:32
To: pce@ietf.org; draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org
Cc: pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: RE: WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

This poll has ended, with the result that this document will be adopted by the 
PCE working group.

Authors, once the I-D submission tool has reopened, please resubmit the 
document as draft-ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec-00.

Best regards
Jon and Julien


From: Jonathan Hardwick [mailto:jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com]
Sent: 20 February 2018 13:34
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: pce-cha...@ietf.org; 
draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org
Subject: WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating "yes/support" 
or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Jonathan Hardwick]

This poll has ended, with the result that this document will be adopted by the 
PCE working group.

Authors, once the I-D submission tool has reopened, please resubmit the 
document as draft-ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec-00.

Best regards
Jon and Julien


From: Jonathan Hardwick [mailto:jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com]
Sent: 20 February 2018 13:34
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: pce-cha...@ietf.org; draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org
Subject: WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating "yes/support" 
or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Takuya Miyasaka]

Yes/Support

Thanks,
Takuya

> -Original Message-
> 
> Dear PCE WG
> 
> 
> 
> This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 
> a PCE working group document.
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/
> 
> 
> 
> Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating 
> "yes/support" or "no/do not support".  If indicating
> no, please state your reasons.  If yes, please also feel free to provide 
> comments you'd like to see addressed once the
> document is a WG document.
> 
> 
> 
> The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.
> 
> 
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Jon and Julien
> 
> 



___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Zhuangshunwan]

Yes/Support.

Best Regards,
Shunwan


发件人: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Jonathan Hardwick
发送时间: 2018年2月20日 21:34
收件人: pce@ietf.org
抄送: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
主题: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating “yes/support” 
or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Jeff Tantsura]

Adrian,

Would be my pleasure ;-)

Regards,
Jeff

> On Feb 20, 2018, at 12:53, Adrian Farrel  wrote:
> 
> Jeff, I definitely agree with you about kitchen sinks.
> OTOH, in this case the lack of coordination is actually painful and creates a 
> mess since each vendor uses a different way to instruct its devices after a 
> PCinitiate has completed successfully.
>  
> A Deployment Considerations section sounds just the thing. Maybe we will lean 
> on you for text after adoption :-)
>  
> A
>  
>  
> From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jefftant.i...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 20 February 2018 15:39
> To: adr...@olddog.co.uk; 'Jonathan Hardwick'; pce@ietf.org
> Cc: pce-cha...@ietf.org; draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
>  
> I’d “carefully” support the adoption, while functionality is needed, and 
> having complete set in a single protocol has its advantages (and complexity 
> associated), we already have one “kitchen sink” protocol, that has however 
> been designed to support 100M of entries and deal with bursty data, PCEP is 
> yet to get there. Deployment consideration section would be of great value.
>  
> Cheers,
> Jeff
> From: Pce  on behalf of Adrian Farrel 
> 
> Reply-To: 
> Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:17
> To: Jonathan Hardwick , 
> Cc: , 
> Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
>  
> Unsurprisingly, I also think we should adopt this drafts.
> To me it seems like a critical piece of function that we "forgot" when we 
> started to allow thee PCE to have control.
> AFAIK current implementations "bodge" around the issue backing up PCEP 
> messages with other control messages (such as Netconf) to say how the LSP 
> should be used.
> We need a consolidated approach.
>  
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>  
> From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
> Sent: 20 February 2018 13:34
> To: pce@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
> Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
>  
> Dear PCE WG
>  
> This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 
> a PCE working group document.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/
>  
> Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating 
> “yes/support” or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your 
> reasons.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see 
> addressed once the document is a WG document.
>  
> The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.
>  
> Many thanks,
>  
> Jon and Julien
>  
> ___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Adrian Farrel]

Jeff, I definitely agree with you about kitchen sinks.
OTOH, in this case the lack of coordination is actually painful and creates a 
mess since each vendor uses a different way to instruct its devices after a 
PCinitiate has completed successfully.
 
A Deployment Considerations section sounds just the thing. Maybe we will lean 
on you for text after adoption :-)
 
A
 
 
From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jefftant.i...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 20 February 2018 15:39
To: adr...@olddog.co.uk; 'Jonathan Hardwick'; pce@ietf.org
Cc: pce-cha...@ietf.org; draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
 
I’d “carefully” support the adoption, while functionality is needed, and having 
complete set in a single protocol has its advantages (and complexity 
associated), we already have one “kitchen sink” protocol, that has however been 
designed to support 100M of entries and deal with bursty data, PCEP is yet to 
get there. Deployment consideration section would be of great value.
 
Cheers,
Jeff
From: Pce  on behalf of Adrian Farrel 

Reply-To: 
Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:17
To: Jonathan Hardwick , 
Cc: , 
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
 
Unsurprisingly, I also think we should adopt this drafts.
To me it seems like a critical piece of function that we "forgot" when we 
started to allow thee PCE to have control.
AFAIK current implementations "bodge" around the issue backing up PCEP messages 
with other control messages (such as Netconf) to say how the LSP should be used.
We need a consolidated approach.
 
Thanks,
Adrian
 
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: 20 February 2018 13:34
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
 
Dear PCE WG
 
This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/> 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/
 
Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating “yes/support” 
or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.
 
The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.
 
Many thanks,
 
Jon and Julien
 
___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce 
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Jeff Tantsura]

I’d “carefully” support the adoption, while functionality is needed, and having 
complete set in a single protocol has its advantages (and complexity 
associated), we already have one “kitchen sink” protocol, that has however been 
designed to support 100M of entries and deal with bursty data, PCEP is yet to 
get there. Deployment consideration section would be of great value.

 

Cheers,

Jeff

From: Pce  on behalf of Adrian Farrel 

Reply-To: 
Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:17
To: Jonathan Hardwick , 
Cc: , 
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

 

Unsurprisingly, I also think we should adopt this drafts.

To me it seems like a critical piece of function that we "forgot" when we 
started to allow thee PCE to have control.

AFAIK current implementations "bodge" around the issue backing up PCEP messages 
with other control messages (such as Netconf) to say how the LSP should be used.

We need a consolidated approach.

 

Thanks,

Adrian

 

From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: 20 February 2018 13:34
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

 

Dear PCE WG

 

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

 

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating “yes/support” 
or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

 

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

 

Many thanks,

 

Jon and Julien

 

___ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce 

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Adrian Farrel]

Unsurprisingly, I also think we should adopt this drafts.
To me it seems like a critical piece of function that we "forgot" when we
started to allow thee PCE to have control.
AFAIK current implementations "bodge" around the issue backing up PCEP messages
with other control messages (such as Netconf) to say how the LSP should be used.
We need a consolidated approach.
 
Thanks,
Adrian
 
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: 20 February 2018 13:34
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03
 
Dear PCE WG
 
This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/
 
Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating "yes/support"
or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes,
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the
document is a WG document.
 
The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.
 
Many thanks,
 
Jon and Julien
 
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Leeyoung]

Hi,

Yes/support.

Thanks,
Young

From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 7:34 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating "yes/support" 
or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Huaimo Chen]

Yes/Support.

Best Regards,
Huaimo
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hardwick
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 8:34 AM
To: pce@ietf.org
Cc: draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating "yes/support" 
or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien

___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Daniele Ceccarelli]

Yes/support

BR
Daniele

From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
Sent: martedì 20 febbraio 2018 14:48
To: Jonathan Hardwick 
Cc: pce@ietf.org; draft-li-pce-pcep-flows...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

Yes/Support!

Regards,
Dhruv (co-author)

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Jonathan Hardwick 
mailto:jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com>> 
wrote:
Dear PCE WG

This is the start of a two week poll on making draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a 
PCE working group document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/

Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating “yes/support” 
or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your reasons.  If yes, 
please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the 
document is a WG document.

The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.

Many thanks,

Jon and Julien


___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Re: [Pce] WG adoption poll for draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03

[Dhruv Dhody]

Yes/Support!

Regards,
Dhruv (co-author)

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Jonathan Hardwick <
jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com> wrote:

> Dear PCE WG
>
>
>
> This is the start of a two week poll on making
> draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec-03 a PCE working group document.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pce-pcep-flowspec/
>
>
>
> Please review the draft and send an email to the list indicating
> “yes/support” or “no/do not support”.  If indicating no, please state your
> reasons.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to
> see addressed once the document is a WG document.
>
>
>
> The poll ends on Tuesday, March 6.
>
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
>
>
> Jon and Julien
>
>
>
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce