[Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-08.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-08.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Path Computation Element (PCE) WG of the IETF. Title: Extension for Stateful PCE to allow Optional Processing of PCE Communication Protocol (PCEP) Objects Authors: Cheng Li Ha

[Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-state-sync-07.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-state-sync-07.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Path Computation Element (PCE) WG of the IETF. Title: Inter Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Procedures. Authors: Stephane Litkowski Siva Sivabalan Cheng

[Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-15.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-15.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 K

Re: [Pce] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-14

Hi Dhruv, I've incorporated your changes and all the other comments that I have received so far. Hopefully I didn't miss anything. Version 15 is uploaded. Thanks a lot for your comments and updates! Thanks, Mike. On Saturday, March 9th, 2024 at 8:23 AM, Dhruv Dhody wrote: > Hi Authors, > >

Re: [Pce] WGLC for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-12

Hi Boris, Sorry for the late reply... 1.1) Yes, it's basically always going to be set to 1. There isn't expected to be any other values there in the future, this field is basically unused. 1.2) I've removed that sentence in version 15. I think the intent was that the PCC can have multiple loop

Re: [Pce] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-13.txt

Hi Andrew, We did keep in sync with the IDR draft authors. The intent is to make the registry the same. There was an issue with interpretation of the Protocol Origin values 10, 20, 30 from RFC 9256. In PCEP we interpreted them as being actual code-points and some implementations have gone that

Re: [Pce] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-13.txt

Hi Andrew, (sorry my email client glitched) We did keep in sync with the IDR draft authors. The intent is to make the registry the same. There was an issue with interpretation of the Protocol Origin values 10, 20, 30 from RFC 9256. In PCEP we interpreted them as being actual code-points and so

Re: [Pce] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-13.txt

Thanks for that explanation Mike. Clear now. Consider my comment on this closed. Thanks! Andrew On 2024-03-17, 10:40 PM, "Mike Koldychev" mailto:mkold...@proton.me>> wrote: [You don't often get email from mkold...@proton.me . Learn why this is important at https