A Set of Monitoring Tools for 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: Protocol Action: 'A set of monitoring tools for Path Computation Element based Architecture' to Proposed Standard The IESG has approved the following document: - 'A set of monitoring tools for Path Computation Element based Architecture ' <draft-ietf-pce-monitoring-09.txt> as a Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Path Computation Element Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Ross Callon. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-monitoring-09.txt
Technical Summary A Path Computation Element (PCE) based architecture has been specified in RFC 4655 for the computation of Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths in MPLS and GMPLS networks. This architecture can be used in the context of single or multiple domains (where a domain refers to a collection of network elements within a common sphere of address management or path computational responsibility such as IGP areas and Autonomous Systems). Path Computation Clients send computation requests to PCEs using the Path Computation Protocol (PCEP). These PCEs may forward the requests to, and cooperate with, other PCEs forming a "path computation chain". In PCE-based environments, it is critical to monitor the state of the path computation chain for troubleshooting and performance monitoring purposes: liveness of each element (PCE) involved in the PCE chain, detection of potential computational resource contention states and statistics in terms of path computation times are examples of such metrics of interest. This document specifies procedures and extensions to PCEP in order to gather such information. Working Group Summary Nothing of note. Not a very loud consensus, but no dissent. Document Quality There are no known implementations of this minor addition to the protocol extension. There are long-term plans to implement, but nothing in the immediate future. Althought the specification got ahead of the implementation, it is felt that it would be useful to complete the publication process and move on. Personnel Julien Meuric (email@example.com) is the Document Shepherd. Adrian Farrel (firstname.lastname@example.org) is the Responsible AD.