[Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-24.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-24.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

[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 r

[Pce] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-26: 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.) Plea

[Pce] Re: WG Adoption of draft-koldychev-pce-operational-09

Hi Chairs, WG, I support this draft to be adopted by PCE WG. This draft serves to clarify certain aspects of PCEP to make it easier to produce interoperable implementations of PCEP. It helps operator to have more accurate control of the carrier network path and enhance the security in the MBB

[Pce] Re: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-25: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Bonjour Med, You are correct and I stand corrected for the length field being 16 bits... too early in the morning for me ;-) Regards -éric From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com Date: Wednesday, 2 April 2025 at 10:16 To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) , The IESG Cc: draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy

[Pce] Re: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-25: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Salut Éric, Regarding: > > ### Sections 4.2.1 & 4.2.3 > > `It is RECOMMENDED that the size of the symbolic name for the SR > Policy is > limited to 255 bytes. ` why only "RECOMMENDED" when the Length > field can only > indicate 255 maximum ? Suggest using MUST rather RECOMMENDED here. The len

[Pce] Comments on draft draft-many-pce-stateful-amendment-01

 Dear authors, I would raised come comments on your draft following its presentation during the last IETF meeting. First, regarding section 2, using PcRpt to request a path to PCE is not a good idea, IMHO, for many reasons:  - You claim that it will simplify the protocol and reduce the number

[Pce] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5440 (8344)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5440, "Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)". -- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8344 -- Type: Editori

[Pce] [Errata Verified] RFC5440 (8344)

The following errata report has been verified for RFC5440, "Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)". -- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8344 -- Status: Verif

[Pce] Re: Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-22: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Med, Please check updated version (v24) with comments from you, Deb and Mike addressed. One more response - I haven't changed Segment Routing to SR-MPLS for Path Setup Type 1 as even value in IANA registry and in RFC8664 is not calling it SR-MPLS: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc866

[Pce] Re: [**EXTERNAL**] IPR poll for draft-koldychev-pce-operational

I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft that should be disclosed in accordance with IETF IPR rules. Thanks, Siva From: Dhruv Dhody Sent: Monday, March 31, 2025 5:18 AM To: Mike Koldychev ; Sivabalan, Siva ; Siva Sivabalan ; Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) ; Diego Achaval (Nokia) ; hko.