Skip to main content

Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
RFC 7150

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2018-12-20
11 (System)
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (changed abstract to 'The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) is used to convey path computation requests and responses …
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (changed abstract to 'The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) is used to convey path computation requests and responses both between Path Computation Clients (PCCs) and Path Computation Elements (PCEs) and 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 existing PCEP object.')
2015-10-14
11 (System) Notify list changed from pce-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints@ietf.org to (None)
2014-03-04
11 (System) RFC published
2014-03-03
11 (System) RFC Editor state changed to <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc7150">AUTH48-DONE</a> from AUTH48
2014-02-27
11 (System) RFC Editor state changed to <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc7150">AUTH48</a> from EDIT
2014-01-24
11 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2014-01-24
11 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress
2014-01-24
11 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors
2014-01-23
11 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2014-01-17
11 Amy Vezza State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent
2014-01-17
11 (System) RFC Editor state changed to EDIT
2014-01-17
11 (System) Announcement was received by RFC Editor
2014-01-16
11 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2014-01-16
11 Amy Vezza State changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed
2014-01-16
11 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2014-01-16
11 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2014-01-16
11 Stewart Bryant Ballot writeup was changed
2013-12-19
11 Cindy Morgan State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation
2013-12-19
11 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Susan Hares.
2013-12-19
11 Barry Leiba [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Barry Leiba
2013-12-18
11 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sean Turner
2013-12-18
11 Spencer Dawkins [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins
2013-12-18
11 Joel Jaeggli [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Joel Jaeggli
2013-12-18
11 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Stephen Farrell
2013-12-18
11 Benoît Claise [Ballot comment]
Thanks for the Management Considerations section.

Regards, the OPS AD.
2013-12-18
11 Benoît Claise [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise
2013-12-18
11 Brian Haberman [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Haberman
2013-12-17
11 Richard Barnes [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Richard Barnes
2013-12-17
11 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling
2013-12-17
11 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
For what it is worth, I agree with Robert Spark's Gen-ART review comment that some highlighting of the interoperability challenges of vendor-specific options …
[Ballot comment]
For what it is worth, I agree with Robert Spark's Gen-ART review comment that some highlighting of the interoperability challenges of vendor-specific options might have been useful. I don't think it is a big problem in this case (and this seems to be confirmed by Adrian's reply) but some similar RFCs have talked about it. If you want to take a look at what has been done in the past, there's text in RFC 5094 Section 1 last two paragraphs, RFC 4243 Section 3 last paragraph, RFC 3588 Section 11.1.1 two last sentences, for instance. The general thrust is emphasising the local applicability of vendor information, encouraging documentation of vendor's information elements, and recommending standardisation when there's more general interest for the information in question.
2013-12-17
11 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jari Arkko
2013-12-11
11 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] Position for Adrian Farrel has been changed to Recuse from Abstain
2013-12-11
11 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, Abstain, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant State changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant Placed on agenda for telechat - 2013-12-19
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant Ballot has been issued
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Stewart Bryant
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant Created "Approve" ballot
2013-12-11
11 Stewart Bryant Ballot writeup was changed
2013-12-09
11 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed
2013-12-09
11 Pearl Liang
IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-11.  Authors should review the comments and/or questions below.  Please report any inaccuracies and respond to any questions as soon …
IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-11.  Authors should review the comments and/or questions below.  Please report any inaccuracies and respond to any questions as soon as possible.

IANA's reviewer has the following comments/questions:

IANA understands that, upon approval of this document, there are two
actions which must be completed.

First, in the PCEP Objects sub-registry of the Path Computation Element
Protocol (PCEP) Numbers registry located at:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep

IANA is requested to allocate a new Object-Class Value described as
follows:

Object-Class Value    Name                              Reference
  TBD1                  VENDOR-INFORMATION              [RFC-to-be]
              Object-Type
                0: Unassigned
                1: Vendor-Specific Constraints            [RFC-to-be]
                2-255: Unassigned

Second, in the PCEP TLV Type Indicators sub-registry of the Path
Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers registry located at:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep

IANA is requested to register the following new PCEP TLV:

Value: TBD2
Description: VENDOR-INFORMATION-TLV
Reference: [RFC-to-be]

IANA understands that these are the only actions required to be completed upon approval of this document.

Note:  The actions requested in this document will not be completed
until the document has been approved for publication as an RFC.
This message is only to confirm what actions will be performed.
2013-12-09
11 (System) State changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call (ends 2013-12-09)
2013-12-05
11 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Warren Kumari.
2013-11-28
11 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Susan Hares
2013-11-28
11 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Susan Hares
2013-11-28
11 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Warren Kumari
2013-11-28
11 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Warren Kumari
2013-11-26
11 Robert Sparks Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Robert Sparks.
2013-11-25
11 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Robert Sparks
2013-11-25
11 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Robert Sparks
2013-11-25
11 Cindy Morgan IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed
2013-11-25
11 Cindy Morgan
The following Last Call announcement was sent out:<br><br>From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
CC: <pce@ietf.org>
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender: …
The following Last Call announcement was sent out:<br><br>From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
CC: <pce@ietf.org>
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender: <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-11.txt> (Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation Element communication Protocol) to Proposed Standard


The IESG has received a request from the Path Computation Element WG
(pce) to consider the following document:
- 'Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation Element
  communication Protocol'
  <draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-11.txt> as Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-12-09. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


  The Path Computation Element communication 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 existing PCEP object.




The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.


2013-11-25
11 Cindy Morgan State changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested
2013-11-25
11 Stewart Bryant Last call was requested
2013-11-25
11 Stewart Bryant Ballot approval text was generated
2013-11-25
11 Stewart Bryant Ballot writeup was generated
2013-11-25
11 Stewart Bryant State changed to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested
2013-11-25
11 Stewart Bryant Last call announcement was generated
2013-10-31
11 Adrian Farrel Shepherding AD changed to Stewart Bryant
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric IESG state changed to Publication Requested
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric State Change Notice email list changed to pce-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints@tools.ietf.org
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric Responsible AD changed to Adrian Farrel
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric Working group state set to Submitted to IESG for Publication
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric IESG state set to Publication Requested
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric IESG process started in state Publication Requested
2013-10-31
11 Julien Meuric Changed document writeup
2013-10-17
11 Adrian Farrel New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-11.txt
2013-09-24
10 Julien Meuric Changed document writeup
2013-09-24
10 Julien Meuric Intended Status changed to Proposed Standard from None
2013-09-23
10 Julien Meuric Changed document writeup
2013-09-23
10 Julien Meuric Document shepherd changed to Julien Meuric
2013-07-03
10 Julien Meuric IETF WG state changed to WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up from In WG Last Call
2013-06-12
10 Julien Meuric IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document
2013-04-22
10 Adrian Farrel New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-10.txt
2013-04-16
09 Adrian Farrel New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-09.txt
2012-08-30
08 Fatai Zhang New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-08.txt
2012-08-26
07 Fatai Zhang New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-07.txt
2012-07-08
06 Fatai Zhang New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-06.txt
2011-12-01
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-05.txt
2011-11-14
05 (System) Document has expired
2011-05-04
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-04.txt
2010-09-29
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-03.txt
2010-09-16
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-02.txt
2010-03-01
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-01.txt
2009-07-27
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-00.txt