On 10/12/2015 07:58 AM, Dhruv Dhody wrote:
Hi Authors,
In the stateful PCE draft [1], it says –
The LSP Identifiers TLV MUST be included in the LSP object in PCRpt
messages for RSVP-signaled LSPs.
The SR draft [2] did not mention anything about LSP Identifier TLV.
And in implementations that I am aware of, SR-TE LSP still uses the
LSP-Identifier TLV. Is that correct? (I personally think so!!)
If yes, do you think there is a need to update –
-[1] to say all LSPs (and not just RSVP-signaled).
-Or [2] to say that LSP-Identifier TLV are also applicable to SR and
MUST be included.
The wording in stateful draft is meant to proscribe behavior for RSVP
(as that is what RFC5440 assumes), while allowing different setup
mechanisms
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-lsp-setup-type/)
specify their own LSP identifier format.
In this spirit I think the SR draft should be updated to explicitly
state that SR reuses the same identifier format as RSVP (or whatever is
appropriate).
Bye,
Robert
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
