[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Document Action: 'PCE Communication Protocol (PCECP) Specific Requirements for Inter-Area Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering' to Informational RFC



The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'PCE Communication Protocol (PCECP) Specific Requirements for 
   Inter-Area Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS 
   (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering '
   <draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-05.txt> as an Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Path Computation Element Working 
Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Ross Callon and Bill Fenner.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-05.txt

Technical Summary
 
   This document lists a detailed set of requirements for the Path 
   Computation Element Communication Protocol for support of inter-
   area TE-LSP path computation. This specifically applies to paths 
   that cross multiple areas within a single IGP routing domain. It 
   complements the generic requirements for a PCE Communication 
   Protocol. 
 
Working Group Summary
 
   no dissent reported. 
 
Protocol Quality
 
   Ross Callon has reviewed this spec for the IESG. As a requirements 
   document, it inherently isn't implemented, but there is ongoing 
   work to update the PCE Communications Protocol to handle inter-area
   path computation consistent with these requirements. 

Note to RFC Editor
 
   The email address for Nabil Bitar (in section 11 contributors'
   addresses) should be nabil.n.bitar at verizon.com. 

   Please replace the second paragraph of section 5 (Manageability
   Considerations) as follows:

   Old Text (one paragraph to be removed):

   A built in diagnostic tool MUST be defined to monitor the 
   performances of a PCE chain, in case of multiple-PCE inter-area path 
   computation. It MUST allow determining the minimum maximum and 
   average response time globally for the chain, and on a per PCE basis.

   New Text (two paragraphs to be added):

   It is really important, for diagnostic and troubleshooting reasons,
   to monitor the availability and performances of each PCE of a PCE
   chain used for inter-area path computation. Particularly it is 
   really important to identify the PCE(s) responsible for a delayed
   reply. 

   Hence a mechanism MUST be defined to monitor the performances of a
   PCE chain. It MUST allow determining the availability of each PCE
   of the chain as well as its minimum maximum and average response
   time.


_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce