Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) Protocol Extensions for Usage with Point-to-Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
RFC 8623
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 12 and is now closed.
Alvaro Retana No Objection
Roman Danyliw (was Discuss) No Objection
Thank you for addressing my DISCUSS.
(Deborah Brungard; former steering group member) Yes
(Adam Roach; former steering group member) No Objection
(Alexey Melnikov; former steering group member) No Objection
(Alissa Cooper; former steering group member) No Objection
(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection
(Benjamin Kaduk; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection
Thank you for addressing my Discuss point!
(Ignas Bagdonas; former steering group member) No Objection
(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) No Objection
(Martin Vigoureux; former steering group member) No Objection
(Mirja Kühlewind; former steering group member) No Objection
Just a quick clarification question on fragmentation: I'm wondering if it is really necessary to define a fragmentation mechanism/bit for each object separately (e.g also RFC8306) or if it would be more appropriate to allocate one bit in the common header? Just asking as I'm really not an expert here...
(Suresh Krishnan; former steering group member) No Objection
* Section 7.2. "The special value of all zeros for this TLV is used to refer to all paths pertaining to a particular PLSP-ID." Can you clarify what fields are all zero? What would the length be?