Subject: Re: [Pce] Whither Stateless PCE?

From: Robert Varga <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:44:51 +0200

On 04/08/2016 07:04 PM, [email-masked] wrote:
> Hi,

Hello,

> I fully agree that stateful PCE draft needs to be more clear about how a
> PCC retrieves a path when the delegation starts and the LSP has just
> been configured (does it need to compute locally first and then
> delegate, or do PCReq as Olivier proposed …).

RFC5440's spirit is that the PCC is the ultimate owner of LSP state. I
do believe both behaviors are valid and should be a matter of local PCC
policy rather than protocol specification.

> I want to add my voice to what Olivier said about the inconsistent
> behaviors we see today in implementations leading to lack of
> interoperability.

Does this statement refer to multiple PCE implementations or multiple
PCC implementations?

Thanks,
Robert