http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2906 <pre>The Path Computation Element (pce) working group in the Routing Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. Path Computation Element (pce) ------------------------------------------------ Current Status: Active Working Group Chairs: JP Vasseur &lt;jpv&lt; at &gt;cisco.com&gt; Julien Meuric &lt;julien.meuric&lt; at &gt;orange.com&gt; Secretaries: Daniel King &lt;daniel&lt; at &gt;olddog.co.uk&gt; Assigned Area Director: Adrian Farrel &lt;adrian&lt; at &gt;olddog.co.uk&gt; Mailing list Address: pce&lt; at &gt;ietf.org To Subscribe: http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pce/ Charter of Working Group: The PCE Working Group is chartered to specify the required protocols so as to enable a Path Computation Element (PCE)-based architecture for the computation of paths for MPLS and GMPLS Point to Point and Point to Multi-point Traffic Engineered LSPs. In this architecture path computation does not necessarily occur on the head-end (ingress)</pre> The IESG 2013-05-17T16:01:07 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2903 <pre>Hi, The IESG has just approved your recharter without sending it for external review. The charter page will be updated in due course. Thanks, Adrian </pre> Adrian Farrel 2013-05-16T17:07:41 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2901 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element Working Group of the IETF. Title : PCE-based Computation Procedure To Compute Shortest Constrained P2MP Inter-domain Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths Author(s) : Quintin Zhao Dhruv Dhody Zafar Ali Daniel King Ramon Casellas Filename : draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-04.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2013-05-15 Abstract: The ability to compute paths for constrained point-to-multipoint (P2MP) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs) across multiple domains has been identified as a key requirement for the deployment of P2MP services in MPLS and GMPLS networks. The Path Computation Element (PCE) has been recognized as an appropriate technology for the determination of inter-doma</pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-05-15T07:16:49 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2897 <pre>Hi, No-one came back to me on the list or in private in the last (almost) three weeks with any comments. Maybe everyone is happy/shy/vacationing. Anyway, the authors have no more work in the queue for this I-D and believe it is cooked. Chairs, over to you. Thanks, Adrian TLV the </pre> Adrian Farrel 2013-05-12T19:23:36 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2894 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element Working Group of the IETF. Title : PCEP Extensions for Stateful PCE Author(s) : Edward Crabbe Jan Medved Ina Minei Robert Varga Filename : draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-04.txt Pages : 54 Date : 2013-05-10 Abstract: The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path computations in response to Path Computation Clients (PCCs) requests. Although PCEP explicitly makes no assumptions regarding the information available to the PCE, it also makes no provisions for synchronization or PCE control of timing and sequence of path computations within and across PCEP sessions. This document describes a set of extensions to PCEP to enable stateful control </pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-05-10T16:58:02 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2881 <pre>Dear authors of the aforementioned I-D, Are you aware of any other IPR that applies to draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-aps-req? If so, has all this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules? (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details) Note that an IPR was disclosed on this I-D last summer. A response from each of you is expected. Regards, JP &amp; Julien </pre> Julien Meuric 2013-04-30T09:12:57 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2880 <pre>Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science We are researchers from different parts of the world and conducted a study on the world’s biggest bogus computer science conference WORLDCOMP ( http://sites.google.com/site/worlddump1 ) organized by Prof. Hamid Arabnia from University of Georgia, USA. We submitted a fake paper to WORLDCOMP 2011 and again (the same paper with a modified title) to WORLDCOMP 2012. This paper had numerous fundamental mistakes. Sample statements from that paper include: (1). Binary logic is fuzzy logic and vice versa (2). Pascal developed fuzzy logic (3). Object oriented languages do not exhibit any polymorphism or inheritance (4). TCP and IP are synonyms and are part of OSI model (5). Distributed systems deal with only one computer (6). Laptop is an example for a super computer (7). Operating system is an example for computer hardware Also, our paper did not express any conceptual meaning. However, it was accepted both the times without any modifications (and without</pre> johnsonhammond1< at >hushmail.com 2013-04-27T17:30:14 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2879 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element Working Group of the IETF. Title : Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation Element Protocol Author(s) : Fatai Zhang Adrian Farrel Filename : draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-10.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2013-04-22 Abstract: The Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) is used to convey path computation requests and responses between Path Computation Clients (PCCs) and Path Computation Elements (PCEs), and also between cooperating PCEs. In PCEP the path computation requests carry details of the constraints and objective functions that the PCC wishes the PCE to apply in its computation. This document defines a facility to carry vendor-specific information in PCEP using a dedicated object and a new Type-Length-Variable that can be carried in any exist</pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-04-23T05:05:19 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2878 <pre>Hi, I spent some time discussing changes to draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints with Ina and Fatai. It turns out that the main change is to rename the object and TLV from "vendor constraints" to "vendor information". The scope of *this* draft still remains vendor constraints, but largely through this renaming, we make the mechanism available for other vendor-specific uses documented in future specifications. Otherwise, it seems to me that the changes are not actually substantive, so I will post a new revision and let you comment. If you have any issues, let's discuss them and see what additional changes we need to make. Cheers, Adrian </pre> Adrian Farrel 2013-04-23T05:01:07 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2877 <pre>Hi, Dan and I have updated our draft as below. We added the table of comparison of stateful/active/etc. as recently discussed on the list. Also a section about the relationship with SDN. And a paragraph about the potential for using PCEP as an information-gathering protocol. That covers, I think, everything that has been discussed on the list. We would be really happy to hear from you if you have questions about PCE that you feel are unanswered in the community. Thanks, Adrian </pre> Adrian Farrel 2013-04-20T19:26:23 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2875 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element Working Group of the IETF. Title : Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation Element Protocol Author(s) : Fatai Zhang Adrian Farrel Filename : draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-09.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2013-04-16 Abstract: The Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) is used to convey path computation requests and responses between Path Computation Clients (PCCs) and Path Computation Elements (PCEs), and also between cooperating PCEs. In PCEP the path computation requests carry details of the constraints and objective functions that the PCC wishes the PCE to apply in its computation. The mechanisms defined for indicating objective functions include the capability to convey vendor-specific objective functions. This document defines a facility to car</pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-04-16T13:14:53 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2872 <pre>Dear all, As discussed in Orlando and according to the consensus in the WG to modify our charter, please find a proposed text. Please comment by April 30th. JP and Julien. Description of Working Group The PCE Working Group is chartered to specify the required protocols so 
as to enable a Path Computation Element (PCE)-based architecture for the 
computation of paths for MPLS and GMPLS Point to Point and Point to 
Multi-point Traffic Engineered LSPs. 

 In this architecture path computation does not necessarily occur on the 
head-end (ingress) LSR, but on some other path computation entity that 
may physically not be located on each head-end LSR. 

 The PCE WG works on application of this model within a single domain 
or within a group of domains (where a domain is a layer, IGP area or 
Autonomous System with limited visibility from the head-end LSR). At 
this time, applying this model to large groups of domains such as the 
Internet is not thought to be possible, and </pre> JP Vasseur (jvasseur 2013-04-16T10:51:48 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2871 <pre>This is just a minor refresh, since the draft was pending expiration. There are still open issues that were raised on the list and will be addressed in the near future. Ina -----Original Message----- From: internet-drafts&lt; at &gt;ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts&lt; at &gt;ietf.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 12:21 PM To: Ina Minei Cc: edc&lt; at &gt;google.com; msiva&lt; at &gt;cisco.com; robert.varga&lt; at &gt;pantheon.sk Subject: New Version Notification for draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-01.txt A new version of I-D, draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Ina Minei and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp Revision: 01 Title: PCEP Extensions for PCE-initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE Model Creation date: 2013-04-10 Group: Individual Submission Number of pages: 14 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-01.txt Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crabbe-pce-pce-initiated-lsp Htmlized: </pre> Ina Minei 2013-04-10T19:23:43 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2870 <pre>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5520, "Preserving Topology Confidentiality in Inter-Domain Path Computation Using a Path-Key-Based Mechanism". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5520&amp;eid=3583 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Abdussalam Baryun &lt;abdussalambaryun&lt; at &gt;gmail.com&gt; Section: 3.2.3 Original Text ------------- The format of a PCReq message is as follows: &lt;PCReq Message&gt;::= &lt;Common Header&gt; [&lt;SVEC-list&gt;] &lt;request-list&gt; where: &lt;svec-list&gt;::=&lt;SVEC&gt;[&lt;svec-list&gt;] &lt;request-list&gt;::=&lt;request&gt;[&lt;request-list&gt;] Corrected Text -------------- The format of a PCReq message is as follows: &lt;PCReq Message&gt;::= &lt;Common Header&gt; [&lt;svec-list&gt;] &lt;request-list&gt; where: &lt;svec-list&gt;::=&lt;SVEC&gt;[&lt;svec-list&gt;] &lt;request-list&gt;::=&lt;request&gt;[&lt;request-list&gt;] Notes</pre> RFC Errata System 2013-04-07T20:21:55 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2855 <pre>Hi PCE WG, As mentioned at IETF86 in Orlando, the authors of the inter-domain P2MP extensions for PCEP have slimmed down the document significantly and we would appreciate (especially vendor) feedback on the document as we prepare for Last Call. The draft can be found at the URL below: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures- 03 The key review questions might be: 1. Does the document make sense (scope, requirements and general readability)? 2. Is there adequate detail for implementation? 3. Did we miss any impact on existing PCEP function? 4. Suitable manageability considerations? 5. Missing any obvious or useful references? Br, Dan. </pre> Daniel King 2013-04-02T19:43:16 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2852 <pre>Hi working group, In Orlando you discussed a paragraph for a charter revision. The work doesn't stop there! In order to officially recharter I need to have the agreed text sent to me as a formal request by the chairs, and I need to see that the WG has consensus behind the text. Thanks, Adrian </pre> Adrian Farrel 2013-04-02T12:01:55 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2850 <pre>Hi All, We recently uploaded the PCE minutes from our IETF86 session. You can find them via the URL below: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minutes/minutes-86-pce If you have comments please send them via email to the co-chairs (and moi) by April 5, 2013. Br, Dan. </pre> Daniel King 2013-03-28T21:02:58 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2849 <pre>Dear PCE'rs, can you please review draft-sivabalan-pce-disco-stateful and send your comments to the list? The draft is at: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sivabalan-pce-disco-stateful/. Also, can you please let us know if you are in favor/opposed to adopting draft-sivabalan-pce-disco-stateful as a PCE WG document? Thanks a lot in advance, Siva and Jan </pre> Jan Medved (jmedved 2013-03-27T22:48:53 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2848 <pre> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element Working Group of the IETF. Title : Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to compute service aware Label Switched Path (LSP). Author(s) : Dhruv Dhody Vishwas Manral Zafar Ali George Swallow Kenji Kumaki Filename : draft-ietf-pce-pcep-service-aware-00.txt Pages : 17 Date : 2013-03-26 Abstract: In certain networks like financial information network (stock/ commodity trading) and enterprises using cloud based applications, Latency (delay), Latency-Variation (jitter) and Packet loss is becoming a key requirement for path computation along with other constraints and metrics. Latency, Latency-Variation and Packet Loss is associated with the Service Level Agreement (SLA) be</pre> internet-drafts< at >ietf.org 2013-03-26T14:05:34 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2839 <pre>Hi, Please find some review comments for draft - PCEP Extensions for Stateful PCE draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-02 1. In section 5.4 State synchronization “A PCE SHOULD NOT send PCUpd messages to a PCC before State Synchronization is complete. A PCC SHOULD NOT send PCReq messages to a PCE before State Synchronization is complete. This is to allow the PCE to get the best possible view of the network before it starts computing new paths.” +-+-+ +-+-+ |PCC| |PCE| +-+-+ +-+-+ | | |-----PCRpt, SYNC=1-----&gt;| (Sync start) | | |-----PCRpt, SYNC=1-----&gt;| | . | | . | | . | </pre> KONDREDDY VENUGOPAL REDDY 2013-03-22T11:58:28 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.pce/2831 <pre>On behalf of Ina and the TPC: Dear PCE colleagues, The MPLS 2013 International Conference, the 16th Annual International Conference on MPLS and Related Technologies, will be held November 17-20, in Washington, DC. The Technical Program Committee is soliciting abstracts summarizing a proposed presentation representing original/unpublished work covering cutting-edge topics in MPLS, SDN and Virtualization. Presentations covering new technologies and operational experience are solicited from network equipment vendors, service/transport providers, government agencies, the research community, and enterprise users. The deadline for submission of presentation proposals is April 29, 2013. If you want further information on MPLS 2013 or want to submit a presentation abstract, please see the following URL: http://www.isocore.com/mpls2013/call_for_papers/cfp.htm Please note that PCE is one of the topics specifically listed in the CFP, and PCE topics have been presented at this conference in the past. Re</pre> Julien Meuric 2013-03-14T14:25:21 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.ietf.pce