Hi Marina, Thanks for that suggestion, I like that idea. I assume that we would need to identify cases, where it makes sense to allow LSP creation (cases, where LSP is down temporarily and there is chance that it will go up later - e.g. ERO or BSID validation) and those, where it still makes sense to reject creation, because it is clear that such LSP will never go up (e.g. LSP with some unsupported feature enabled).
Can you (or other WG members) think about any other use cases for that flag? I'm just thinking if there can be any cases, which would not fit into group described above. Regards, Samuel From: Marina Fizgeer <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, 3 August 2025 at 14:16 To: Andrew Stone (Nokia) <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <[email protected]> Cc: Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> Subject: RE: PCE WG Minutes for IETF 123 Hi, PCE WG, Samuel, I have some thought/suggestion regarding the new D flag in the draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sidor-pce-binding-label-sid-extensions/. I believe that it is a very good idea to have such a flag, which gives the option to set an LSP, even if it hasn't passed validation, in a down state. I think it may be useful to expand the use of this flag to other cases and make it more generic. As an example, today PCE-init LSP can only be established if the resolution was successful. This may cause performance issues in the case of creating multiple LSPs in the single PCEInit message. Why not add such a flag in the case of creating a PCE-init LSP as well? If this flag is 'on' but the resolution fails, such an LSP will be set to a down state. I think we can find other use cases where the use of this flag can be helpful and convenient. What do you think? Best regards, [Logo]<https://ribboncommunications.com/> Marina Fizgeer Sr. Manager, Systems Architecture | Ribbon M +972.544860016 Petah Tikva, Israel [Banner]<https://ribboncommunications.com/?_gl=1*6qlbuc*_gcl_au*MjA3NzE5OTk5NC4xNzI4NDE0NDY4*_ga*NTIxNzg1MDgxLjE3Mjg0MTQ0NjM.*_ga_VCEZ9Q3S3Y*MTcyODQ1MjEzMC4yLjEuMTcyODQ1MjE4OS4xLjAuMTA4NjExNTU4> From: Andrew Stone (Nokia) <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2025 11:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Pce] PCE WG Minutes for IETF 123 Hi PCE WG, Please find the minutes for PCE WG session at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/123/materials/minutes-123-pce-202507250730-00 Thanks to those who contributed to the minutes. Please reach out to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> in case any correction needs to be made. Thanks, Andrew (PCE Secretary) Disclaimer This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
