Hi Roman, On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 9:38 PM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-34: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ** Section 14.2. > > 14.2. PCECC-CAPABILITY sub-TLV's Flag field > > [RFC9050] created a sub-registry within the "Path Computation Element > Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry to manage the value of the PCECC- > CAPABILITY sub-TLV's 32-bit Flag field. IANA is requested to > allocate a new bit position within this registry, as follows: > > The registration policy of PCECC-CAPABILITY sub-TLV > (https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcecc-capability) is > “Standards Action”. This document has experimental status and does not > qualify > for registration. > > Dhruv: We have a document in the PCE WG to fix it - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-iana-update/ The document is being fast tracked by the WG. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you to Mallory Knodel for the GENART review. > > ** This document has been submitted with “experimental” status. What is > the > nature of the experiment in question here? > > > Dhruv: Here is some initial suggested text that authors can build on - The procedures outlined in this document are experimental. The experiment aims to explore the use of PCE (and PCEP) for end-to-end traffic assurance in Native IP networks through multiple BGP sessions. Additional implementation is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the operational impact, scalability, and stability of the mechanism described. Feedback from deployments will be crucial in determining whether this specification should advance from Experimental to the IETF Standards Track. Thanks! Dhruv
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org
