Thanks a lot, Ketan.
Version v27 submitted.
Regards,
Samuel
From: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 5:51 PM
To: Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <ssi...@cisco.com>
Cc: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>;
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy...@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org;
pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] Ketan Talaulikar's Yes on
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: (with COMMENT)
Hi Samuel,
Thanks for the quick response. This looks good to me.
Thanks,
Ketan
On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 8:29 PM Samuel Sidor (ssidor)
<ssi...@cisco.com<mailto:ssi...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Thanks Ketan,
Please let me know if you are fine with attached version. I can submit it then.
Regards,
Samuel
-----Original Message-----
From: Ketan Talaulikar via Datatracker
<nore...@ietf.org<mailto:nore...@ietf.org>>
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 3:04 PM
To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>>
Cc:
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy...@ietf.org>;
pce-cha...@ietf.org<mailto:pce-cha...@ietf.org>;
pce@ietf.org<mailto:pce@ietf.org>
Subject: [Pce] Ketan Talaulikar's Yes on
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: (with COMMENT)
Ketan Talaulikar has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: Yes
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-segment-routing-policy-cp/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for addressing my discuss points/comments and other comments. Following
are further comments suggested to improve the updated text that was introduced.
Provided inline in the idnits format output for the v26 of the document.
209 The term "LSP" in this document represents Candidate Path within an
210 SR Policy. In the context of SR Policy for SRv6, the term "LSP" in
211 this document refers to an SRv6 path, which is represented as a list
212 of SRv6 segments.
<minor> How about?
CURRENT
In the context of SR Policy for SRv6, the term "LSP" in this document refers to
an SRv6 path, which is represented as a list of SRv6 segments.
SUGGEST
In the context of SR Policy for SRv6 (refer [RFC9603]), the term "LSP" in this
document refers to an SRv6 path, which is represented as a list of SRv6
segments.
249 [RFC8697] specifies the mechanism for the capability advertisement of
250 the Association Types supported by a PCEP speaker by defining an
251 ASSOC-Type-List TLV to be carried within an OPEN object. This
252 capability exchange for the SR Policy Association Type MUST be done
253 before using the SRPA. To that aim, a PCEP speaker MUST include the
254 SRPA Type (6) in the ASSOC-Type-List TLV and MUST receive the same
255 from the PCEP peer before using the SRPA (Section 6.1). SRPA MUST be
256 assigned for all SR Policy LSPs by PCEP speaker originating the LSP
257 if capability was advertised by both PCEP speakers.
<major> What would be the error reported by the PCEP speaker if it were to
received an SR LSP (say using mechanism in RFC8664) without an SRPA even after
successful capability negotiation? Perhaps there is an existing error that can
be used?
294 SR Policy Candidate Path Identifier uniquely identifies the SR Policy
295 Candidate Path within the context of an SR Policy. SR Policy
296 Candidate Path Identifier is assigned by PCEP peer originating the
297 LSP. Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT change their SR
298 Policy Candidate Path Identifiers for the lifetime of the PCEP
299 session. Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT carry same SR
300 Policy Candidate Path Identifiers in their SRPAs. If the above
<minor> How about?
CURRENT
Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT carry same SR Policy Candidate
Path Identifiers in their SRPAs.
SUGGEST
Two or more Candidate Paths within an SR Policy MUST NOT carry same SR Policy
Candidate Path Identifiers in their SRPAs.
< EoR v26 >
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org<mailto:pce@ietf.org>
To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org<mailto:pce-le...@ietf.org>
--- Begin Message ---
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-27.txt is now
available. It is a work item of the Path Computation Element (PCE) WG of the
IETF.
Title: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions
for Segment Routing (SR) Policy Candidate Paths
Authors: Mike Koldychev
Siva Sivabalan
Samuel Sidor
Colby Barth
Shuping Peng
Hooman Bidgoli
Name: draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-27.txt
Pages: 30
Dates: 2025-04-04
Abstract:
A Segment Routing (SR) Policy is an ordered list of instructions,
called "segments" that represent a source-routed policy. Packet
flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is
instantiated. An SR Policy is made of one or more candidate paths.
This document specifies the Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) extension to signal candidate paths of an SR Policy.
Additionally, this document updates RFC 8231 to allow delegation and
setup of an SR Label Switched Path (LSP), without using the path
computation request and reply messages. This document is applicable
to both Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) and Segment Routing over
IPv6 (SRv6).
The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp/
There is also an HTMLized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-27
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-27
Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list -- pce@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to pce-le...@ietf.org