Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE
RFC 9357

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, dd@dhruvdhody.com, draft-ietf-pce-lsp-extended-flags@ietf.org, jgs@juniper.net, pce-chairs@ietf.org, pce@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-pce-lsp-extended-flags-09.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag Extension for Stateful PCE'
  (draft-ietf-pce-lsp-extended-flags-09.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Path Computation Element Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Andrew Alston and John Scudder.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-lsp-extended-flags/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   RFC 8231 describes a set of extensions to Path Computation Element
   Communication Protocol (PCEP) to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE
   and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via PCEP.  One of the
   extensions is the LSP object which includes a Flag field with a
   length of 12 bits.  However, all bits of the Flag field have already
   been assigned in RFC 8231, RFC 8281, RFC 8623 and I-D.ietf-pce-
   binding-label-sid.

   This document proposes to define a new LSP-EXTENDED-FLAG TLV for the
   LSP object for an extended flag field.

Working Group Summary

Now that all the 12 bits in the flag field of the LSP object [RFC8231] are 
already allocated, there is a need to have an extended flag in the form of a 
TLV. The response for WGLC was timid mostly because the need for this I-D is 
well understood and agreed upon in the WG. 

There was a discussion on the use of variable length v/s fixed-length (32-bits)
by one WG participant. The discussion and rationale are captured in the 
appendix of the I-D. 

Document Quality

There are various proposals in the WG that require new flags and as those get 
traction, this extension would potentially be implemented soon. 

The usual directorate reviews are enough. No additional reviews are needed.

Personnel

Document Shepherd: Dhruv Dhody
Responsible Area Director: John Scudder

RFC Editor Note