Erik, Thanks for the review. Please see the inline below (prefixed VPB).
Regards, -Pavan On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:23 PM Erik Kline via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color-09: No Objection > > 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-color/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > # Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color-09 > CC @ekline > > * comment syntax: > - https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md > > * "Handling Ballot Positions": > - > https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > > ## Comments > > ### Abstract > > * "a 32-bit numerical attribute" -> "a non-zero 32-bit numerical attribute" > > vis. RFC 9256 S2.1, or perhaps that doesn't apply here? > [VPB] Good question. We use two references for the color attribute -- RFC9012 and RFC9256. In RFC9012, there is no restriction to use zero to represent a color, while in RFC9256, there is (as you point out) an explicit restriction. We decided to err on the side of being lenient in this scenario. We are also aware of at least one implementation that allows the use of "zero" to represent color. The following text in Section 2 would come into play if a PCC implementation does not allow using "zero" to represent a color: "If a PCC is unable to honor a color value passed in a PCUpd or a PCInitiate message, the PCC MUST reject the message and send a PCErr message with Error-type=19 (Invalid Operation) and error-value=TBD1 (Invalid color)." [VPB] That said, the authors don't have a strong preference for this. We will add the restriction if it is deemed essential to have parity with the semantics used in RFC9256. > ### S2, S3.2, or thereabouts > > * How should a color value of zero be handled? > [VPB] This document does not make any special distinction for a zero-color tag. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org >
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org
