Subject: [Pce] Regarding Stateful P2MP

From: Dhruv Dhody <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 00:14:04 +0530

Hi,

So far in the PCE WG, we have a separate ID for -

- Stateful PCE (passive / active)
- Stateful PCE with Initiation Capability

Base
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-10.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-02.txt

GMPLS
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-stateful-pce-gmpls-01.txt
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-remote-initiated-gmpls-lsp-00

So for P2MP, we followed the same approach, and thus -
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-palle-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-05.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-palle-pce-stateful-pce-initiated-p2mp-lsp-04.txt

Now that work is making consistent progress, Does the WG find this
separation useful?
I remember in earlier discussion it was pointed out that not all
implementation of PCE support PCE-Initiation function so they would
prefer a separate documents to claim support fully.

If you have any comments on the content of the drafts, do sent them on
the list.
Hoping to see this work adopted soon :)

Dhruv