A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <email@example.com> To: IETF-Announce <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <email@example.com>, RFC Editor <firstname.lastname@example.org>, pce mailing list <email@example.com>, pce chair <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Document Action: 'A Path Computation Element (PCE) Based Architecture' to Informational RFC The IESG has approved the following document: - 'A Path Computation Element (PCE) Based Architecture ' <draft-ietf-pce-architecture-06.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 David Ward. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-architecture-06.txt
Technical Summary This document specifies the architecture for a Path Computation Element (PCE)-based model to address the problem of path computation in large, multi-domain, multi-region or multi-layer networks. This document describes a set of building blocks for the PCE architecture from which solutions may be constructed. Working Group Summary The WG had a consensus on progressing this document. Protocol Quality Alex Zinin Reviewed this document for the IESG. Note to RFC Editor There are a few nits that should be fixed prior to publication: Nit1>> Section 6.8, third paragraph, Second sentence: However, in a single centralized PCE environment, a stateful PCE is almost a simple matter of remembering all of the TE LSPs the PCE has computed, if it can also be known that the TE LSPs were actually set up, and when they were torn down. This should read: However, in a single centralized PCE environment, a stateful PCE is almost a simple matter of remembering all of the TE LSPs the PCE has computed, that the TE LSPs were actually set up (if this can be known), and when they were torn down. Nit2>> From section 6.8, (I think the seventh paragraph, at the bottom of page 23): A limited form of statefulness might be applied within an otherwise stateful PCE. This should read: A limited form of statefulness might be applied within an otherwise stateless PCE. Nit3>> Section 10, first paragraph, second sentence: There is unlikely to be any impact on intra-domain security, but... This should read: The impact may be less likely to be an issue in the case of intra-domain use of PCE, but ...