From dhruv.dhody@huawei.com Mon Sep 5 21:10:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B3921F847E for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 21:10:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.450, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X6fLSOjLPakL for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 21:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5684821F8483 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 21:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LR30094E2CFAK@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:12:15 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LR3008J52BVFC@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:12:15 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml202-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADU79802; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:12:13 +0800 Received: from SZXEML409-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.136) by szxeml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:12:09 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.184]) by szxeml409-hub.china.huawei.com ([169.254.89.141]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:12:11 +0800 Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 04:11:19 +0000 From: Dhruv Dhody X-Originating-IP: [10.18.1.31] To: "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9BB64C3B@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_/NfblXb9Z1bW21q5l5iJ7Q)" Content-language: en-GB Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: New Version of draft-dhody-pce-pcep-pathkey-mib-02 Thread-index: AcxsSwfw7LxI+8XOS5eRCjDFRgXH6A== X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [Pce] New Version of draft-dhody-pce-pcep-pathkey-mib-02 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 04:10:57 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_/NfblXb9Z1bW21q5l5iJ7Q) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi All, A new version of PCE-PATHKEY-MIB draft has been uploaded. Main Changes in this document: Added Primary and secondary Index similar to MPLS Table; instead of FirstHopIndex and NumberOfHops. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-pathkey-mib-02 Regards, Dhruv ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dhruv Dhody Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, India. Ph +91-9845062422 This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --Boundary_(ID_/NfblXb9Z1bW21q5l5iJ7Q) Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Hi All,

 

A new version of PCE-PATHKEY-MIB draft has been uploaded.

 

Main Changes in this document:

Added Primary and secondary Index similar to MPLS Table; instead of FirstHopIndex and NumberOfHops.

 

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-pathkey-mib-02

 

Regards,

Dhruv

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dhruv Dhody

Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, India. Ph +91-9845062422 

 

This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Boundary_(ID_/NfblXb9Z1bW21q5l5iJ7Q)-- From dhruv.dhody@huawei.com Wed Sep 7 22:52:24 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ECE621F8549 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:52:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.223 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.223 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.375, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uMAxq+X+hwkp for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:52:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBCA21F8494 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 22:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LR600B36WEBZI@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:54:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LR6006DEWEAS3@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:54:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml208-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADQ70444; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:54:10 +0800 Received: from SZXEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.35) by szxeml208-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.60) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:54:05 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.184]) by szxeml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([169.254.173.75]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:54:06 +0800 Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 05:54:03 +0000 From: Dhruv Dhody X-Originating-IP: [10.18.24.98] To: "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9BB650EB@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_ZOWivbEkN+9GM0SpxtRWog)" Content-language: en-US Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: New I-D draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware Thread-index: Acxt67eECXzdHjFvQtKEy4BRgcAPbQ== X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [Pce] New I-D draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 05:52:24 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_ZOWivbEkN+9GM0SpxtRWog) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi All, Based on the recent work done in MPLS, OSPF WG to support Latency, Jitter, Loss as constraints while path computation, we have extended PCEP protocol to support these constraints. Please provide comments and feedback. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware-00 Regards, Dhruv *************************************************************************************** Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies, Bangalore, India, Ph. +91-9845062422 This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! --Boundary_(ID_ZOWivbEkN+9GM0SpxtRWog) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Hi All,

 

Based on the recent work done in MPLS, OSPF WG to support Latency, Jitter, Loss as constraints while path computation, we have extended PCEP protocol to support these constraints.

Please provide comments and feedback.

 

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware-00

 

Regards,

Dhruv

 

***************************************************************************************
Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies, Bangalore, India, Ph. +91-9845062422

This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

 

--Boundary_(ID_ZOWivbEkN+9GM0SpxtRWog)-- From vishwas.ietf@gmail.com Thu Sep 8 10:38:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1A821F8B7C for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:38:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.113 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.485, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2RZwE15rflqa for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f51.google.com (mail-qw0-f51.google.com [209.85.216.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C59FD21F8B6B for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qwm25 with SMTP id 25so887562qwm.38 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:40:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=1IovtgBhCeJ74/UiW7pUD5aqLyjc9IjUTYwnajGWxXs=; b=jxjJsEwWFC9Dq4UIo5pDWiFexTRGACKIxQVZ2MP9HQ5ww75gR7KsCNnkaQ15Dvi/Ha sNyrkwHby1tnuz4lLngtz1IcAXbrp9xlPr66Plvd6UDAheORghDEV9PSmYo0bRrJ8bGE NXDGa8S3MQSYq3sQK0chmi6N2wQiSITeYY5xg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.62.81 with SMTP id w17mr751662qch.168.1315503647230; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:40:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.85.1 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:40:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9BB650EB@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> References: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9BB650EB@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:40:47 -0700 Message-ID: From: Vishwas Manral To: Dhruv Dhody Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e651fd50980aaa04ac718f36 Cc: "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] New I-D draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:38:55 -0000 --0016e651fd50980aaa04ac718f36 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Dhruv, Thanks a lot for posting this to the list. Besides MPLS and OSPF, the same is there in the CCAMP group too. The below is the link for the same: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuxh-ccamp-delay-loss-te-framework-00 Thanks, Vishwas On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Dhruv Dhody wrote: > Hi All, **** > > ** ** > > Based on the recent work done in MPLS, OSPF WG to support Latency, Jitter, > Loss as constraints while path computation, we have extended PCEP protocol > to support these constraints. **** > > Please provide comments and feedback. **** > > ** ** > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware-00 **** > > ** ** > > Regards,**** > > Dhruv**** > > ** ** > > > *************************************************************************************** > * > *Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies, Bangalore, > India, Ph. +91-9845062422**** > > This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, > which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed > above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, > but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or > dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is > prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by > phone or email immediately and delete it!**** > > ** ** > --0016e651fd50980aaa04ac718f36 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Dhruv,
=A0
Thanks a lot for posting this to the list. Besides MPLS and OSPF, the = same is there=A0in the CCAMP group too. The below is the link for the same:=
=A0
Thanks,
Vishwas
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@hu= awei.com> wrote:

Hi All,

=A0

Based on the recent w= ork done in MPLS, OSPF WG to support Latency, Jitter, Loss as constraints w= hile path computation, we have extended PCEP protocol to support these cons= traints.

Please provide commen= ts and feedback.

=A0

h= ttp://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware-00<= span style=3D"COLOR: #1f497d">

=A0

Regards,

Dhruv

=A0

************************= ***************************************************************
Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei= Technologies, Bangalore, India, Ph. +91-9845062422

This e-mail and attachments contain = confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person= or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contai= ned herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disc= losure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended = recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please= notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

=A0

=
--0016e651fd50980aaa04ac718f36-- From dhruv.dhody@huawei.com Mon Sep 12 03:49:27 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F8321F84FB for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:49:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.494 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VJ9SYPdRzWYZ for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:49:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (unknown [58.251.152.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07F221F84DF for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:49:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRE00GDBOS0JO@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:50:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRE00DXZOS0IN@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:50:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADX55805; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:50:23 +0800 Received: from SZXEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.59) by szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:50:22 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.184]) by szxeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([fe80::75b7:3db9:fedc:a56d%13]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:50:17 +0800 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:49:46 +0000 From: Dhruv Dhody X-Originating-IP: [10.18.24.111] To: "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9BB65844@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_NiAaTMLtKBHURHLr96ly+A)" Content-language: en-US Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: Update in ID: draft-dhody-pce-pcep-domain-sequence Thread-index: AcxxOKGkuTRlAQXDT8SZMz6PceJEHA== X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [Pce] Update in ID: draft-dhody-pce-pcep-domain-sequence X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:49:27 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_NiAaTMLtKBHURHLr96ly+A) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Dear All, We have rolled out a new version for DOMAIN-SEQ draft. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-domain-sequence-01 Main Changes done: * Alignment for the new sub-objects * Support for 4 byte AS number We are still awaiting comments/suggestions in WG regarding * New IRO Class Type for domain Sequence * Use of RBNF to explain Subobjects ordering within domain-sequence(IRO Object) For more information refer Message Thread: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pce/current/msg02580.html We plan to resolve this before/during the next IETF meeting. Regards, Dhruv ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dhruv Dhody Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, India. Ph +91-9845062422 This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --Boundary_(ID_NiAaTMLtKBHURHLr96ly+A) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Dear All,

 

We have rolled out a new version for DOMAIN-SEQ draft.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dhody-pce-pcep-domain-sequence-01

 

Main Changes done:

* Alignment for the new sub-objects

* Support for 4 byte AS number

 

We are still awaiting comments/suggestions in WG regarding

* New IRO Class Type for domain Sequence

* Use of RBNF to explain Subobjects ordering within domain-sequence(IRO Object) 

 

For more information refer Message Thread:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pce/current/msg02580.html

 

We plan to resolve this before/during the next IETF meeting.

 

Regards,

Dhruv

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dhruv Dhody

Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore, India. Ph +91-9845062422 

 

This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Boundary_(ID_NiAaTMLtKBHURHLr96ly+A)-- From julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com Wed Sep 14 08:21:08 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D43CA21F8CEB for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 08:21:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.648 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CxaK8JE4Uwqu for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 08:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias245.francetelecom.com [80.12.204.245]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17BD621F8C00 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 08:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omfeda07.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.200]) by omfeda12.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 3945B3B4839 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:23:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from p-mail3.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.50]) by omfeda07.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 19AD415803E for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:23:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from p-mail3.rd.francetelecom.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 27EE7378002 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:27:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr (ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr [10.192.128.47]) by p-mail3.rd.francetelecom.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B5A0378001 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:27:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.44]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:23:15 +0200 Received: from [10.193.71.150] ([10.193.71.150]) by ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:23:15 +0200 Message-ID: <27131_1316013796_4E70C6E4_27131_371246_1_4E70C6E3.6060008@orange-ftgroup.com> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:23:15 +0200 From: Organization: France Telecom User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.13 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pce@ietf.org References: <4E5220EE.3030701@orange-ftgroup.com> In-Reply-To: <4E5220EE.3030701@orange-ftgroup.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2011 15:23:15.0549 (UTC) FILETIME=[3946B8D0:01CC72F2] X-PMX-Version: 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2011.9.14.151514 X-PMX-Spam: Gauge=X, Probability=10%, Report=' TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.5, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_1000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_900_999 0, __ANY_URI 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_XOAT 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __MOZILLA_MSGID 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __TO_NO_NAME 0, __URI_NO_PATH 0, __URI_NS , __USER_AGENT 0' X-PMX-Version: 5.5.9.395186, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2011.9.14.130319 Subject: Re: [Pce] Poll on draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-07 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:21:08 -0000 Hi all. It looks like there is support and no objection. The I-D is adopted as WG document. Authors, you may submit the I-D as draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-00. Regards, JP & Julien Le 22/08/2011 11:27, Julien Meuric a écrit : > Hi PCE WG. > > The updated charter is on line, it is now time to move some of our > work forward. > > There has been much discussion and work about > draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures (version 7 already, > formerly 2 I-Ds). This message starts a poll on adoption of > draft-zhao-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-07 as WG document. > Please reply to this e-mail and tell whether you support the adoption > or not. Comments are always welcome to motivate answers, especially in > case of disagreement. > > Regards, > > JP & Julien > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > ******************************************************************************** IMPORTANT.Les informations contenues dans ce message electronique y compris les fichiers attaches sont strictement confidentielles et peuvent etre protegees par la loi. Ce message electronique est destine exclusivement au(x) destinataire(s) mentionne(s) ci-dessus. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur ou s il ne vous est pas destine, veuillez immediatement le signaler a l expediteur et effacer ce message et tous les fichiers eventuellement attaches. Toute lecture, exploitation ou transmission des informations contenues dans ce message est interdite. Tout message electronique est susceptible d alteration. A ce titre, le Groupe France Telecom decline toute responsabilite notamment s il a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. De meme, il appartient au destinataire de s assurer de l absence de tout virus. IMPORTANT.This e-mail message and any attachments are strictly confidential and may be protected by law. This message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. If you have received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message. Any unauthorized view, usage or disclosure ofthis message is prohibited. Since e-mail messages may not be reliable, France Telecom Group shall not be liable for any message if modified, changed or falsified. Additionally the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. ******************************************************************************** From internet-drafts@ietf.org Thu Sep 15 02:23:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F3821F8669; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:23:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.885 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.714, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9wjrL4PmlI+a; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A497C21F84D3; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:23:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.60 Message-ID: <20110915092327.8261.30462.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:23:27 -0700 Cc: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-00.txt X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:23:28 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element Working Grou= p of the IETF. Title : PCE-based Computation Procedure To Compute Shortest Cons= trained P2MP Inter-domain Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths Author(s) : Quintin Zhao Zafar Ali Tarek Saad Siva Sivabalan Daniel King Ramon Casellas Filename : draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-00.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2011-09-14 The ability to compute paths for constrained point-to-multipoint (P2MP) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs) across multiple domains has been identified as a key requirement for the deployment of P2MP services in MPLS and GMPLS networks. The Path Computation Element (PCE) has been recognized as an appropriate technology for the determination of inter-domain paths of P2MP TE LSPs. This document describes the procedures and extensions to the PCE communication Protocol (PCEP) to handle requests and responses for the computation of inter-domain paths for P2MP TE LSPs. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-p= rocedures-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-pr= ocedures-00.txt From julien.meuric@orange.com Tue Sep 20 08:05:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC18121F8C6A for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:05:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i1BKkO6Qkscu for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEFE921F8C5E for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id EC66E8F0003 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:09:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.47]) by p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E785A8F0002 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:09:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.44]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:08:23 +0200 Received: from [10.193.116.50] ([10.193.116.50]) by ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:08:23 +0200 Message-ID: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:08:19 +0200 From: Julien Meuric Organization: France Telecom User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.13 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "pce@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2011 15:08:23.0119 (UTC) FILETIME=[23D335F0:01CC77A7] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:08:48 -0700 Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:07:44 -0000 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien From daniel@olddog.co.uk Tue Sep 20 08:36:09 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1863F21F8BEB for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:36:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.155 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.155 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.444, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aDMYxJigMWFe for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D4B21F8C0D for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 08:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8KFcWgW030933 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:38:32 +0100 Received: from Serenity (88-97-23-122.dsl.zen.co.uk [88.97.23.122]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8KFcUZ3030922 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:38:31 +0100 From: "Daniel King" To: References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:38:29 +0100 Message-ID: <000a01cc77ab$58bc2520$0a346f60$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQHsGHT/glhOUPjphfgqxLCDnGkWYJUXJSdg Content-Language: en-gb Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:36:09 -0000 Hi All, I support H-PCE, although I am an author of said document. Br, Dan. -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric Sent: 20 September 2011 16:08 To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From Jonathan.Sadler@tellabs.com Tue Sep 20 13:52:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A491F0C9A for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:52:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.402 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.197, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7wwSC2zhv0Hi for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TX2EHSOBE010.bigfish.com (tx2ehsobe005.messaging.microsoft.com [65.55.88.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F7BE1F0C96 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail56-tx2-R.bigfish.com (10.9.14.254) by TX2EHSOBE010.bigfish.com (10.9.40.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:55:20 +0000 Received: from mail56-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail56-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 599665B81BC; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:55:20 +0000 (UTC) X-SpamScore: -34 X-BigFish: VPS-34(zz9371K542M14ffOzz1202hzz1033IL8275dhz2ei2a8h668h839h944h61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:204.154.129.192; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPVD:NLI; H:usnvwwmspedge01.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net; RD:none; EFVD:NLI Received-SPF: neutral (mail56-tx2: 204.154.129.192 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of tellabs.com) client-ip=204.154.129.192; envelope-from=Jonathan.Sadler@tellabs.com; helo=usnvwwmspedge01.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net ; llabsinc.net ; Received: from mail56-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail56-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1316552074238791_2008; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:54:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS031.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.248]) by mail56-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B55717D008F; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from usnvwwmspedge01.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net (204.154.129.192) by TX2EHSMHS031.bigfish.com (10.9.99.131) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.22; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:51:58 +0000 Received: from usnvwwmspht02.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net (172.23.211.70) by usnvwwmspedge01.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net (204.154.131.192) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.254.0; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:49:05 -0500 Received: from EX-NAP.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net ([172.23.211.71]) by usnvwwmspht02.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net ([172.23.211.70]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:51:57 -0500 From: "Sadler, Jonathan B." To: Daniel King , "pce@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:51:55 -0500 Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-Index: AQHsGHT/glhOUPjphfgqxLCDnGkWYJUXJSdggABYJnA= Message-ID: <5292FFA96EC22A4386067E9DBCC0CD2BF78A20A759@EX-NAP.tellabs-west.tellabsinc.net> References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> <000a01cc77ab$58bc2520$0a346f60$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <000a01cc77ab$58bc2520$0a346f60$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: tellabs.com Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:52:55 -0000 Support JonathanS adler -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Danie= l King Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:38 AM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi All,=20 I support H-PCE, although I am an author of said document. =20 Br, Dan. -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julie= n Meuric Sent: 20 September 2011 16:08 To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From ramon.casellas@cttc.es Tue Sep 20 15:55:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0708721F86A5 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:55:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.98 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X5yBxHLlmFp4 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Scorpius.cttc.es (scorpius.cttc.es [84.88.62.197]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3773121F869E for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:55:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castor (postfix@castor.cttc.es [84.88.62.196]) by Scorpius.cttc.es (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8KMvOvP006998 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:57:30 +0200 Received: from [10.55.237.111] (3-254.197-178.cust.bluewin.ch [178.197.254.3]) by castor (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E162FC27D for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:57:24 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E78FE5B.7030002@cttc.es> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:58:03 +0200 From: Ramon Casellas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pce@ietf.org References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (castor); Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:57:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 84.88.62.197 Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:55:15 -0000 El 20/09/2011 17:08, Julien Meuric escribió: > Hi PCE WG. > > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed > several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for > adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply > to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the > I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, > which you are expected to clarify. Yes, support. Thanks Ramon From dhruv.dhody@huawei.com Tue Sep 20 21:10:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969CC21F8797 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 21:10:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.277 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.322, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lHXY0qtIimqh for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 21:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9481C21F86A6 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 21:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRU00DHAUCPW1@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:12:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRU00MSWUCPNN@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:12:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADU59058; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:12:15 +0800 Received: from SZXEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.32) by szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:12:09 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.142]) by szxeml402-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.32]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:12:13 +0800 Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 04:12:12 +0000 From: Dhruv Dhody In-reply-to: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.18.24.76] To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B132CBB5F@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-index: AQHMd6hVxWAU5lvvc0CR0JYqJeN4EpVXObfQ X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 04:10:07 -0000 Yes! I Support. Regards, Dhruv *************************************************************************************** Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies, Bangalore, India, Ph. +91-9845062422 This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 8:38 PM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From i-nishioka@cb.jp.nec.com Tue Sep 20 22:04:17 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC9821F8B82 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:04:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id slTe7C8FEwYj for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp (TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp [202.32.8.193]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F6721F8B7B for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:04:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgate4.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.184]) by tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id p8L56gOn014709 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:06:42 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate4.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id p8L56gn27280 for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:06:42 +0900 (JST) Received: from mail02.kamome.nec.co.jp (mail02.kamome.nec.co.jp [10.25.43.5]) by mailsv3.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id p8L56gGk017884 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:06:42 +0900 (JST) Received: from yonosuke.jp.nec.com ([10.26.220.15] [10.26.220.15]) by mail02.kamome.nec.co.jp with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1018522; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:06:05 +0900 Received: from [10.56.53.247] ([10.56.53.247] [10.56.53.247]) by mail.jp.nec.com with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:06:05 +0900 Message-ID: <4E7970BD.7020607@cb.jp.nec.com> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:06:05 +0900 From: Itaru Nishioka User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pce@ietf.org References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: i-nishioka@cb.jp.nec.com List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:04:17 -0000 Support Itaru Nishioka, NEC (2011/09/21 0:08), Julien Meuric wrote: > Hi PCE WG. > > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times > and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting > draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to > express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to > address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. > > Thank you, > > JP & Julien > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > From fu.xihua@zte.com.cn Tue Sep 20 22:32:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DA5D21F8B52 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:32:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.702 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.136, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EwPB+RBWm7vR for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:32:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 097E121F8B82 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:32:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.99] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 417131441414862; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:33:48 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.20] by [192.168.168.15] with StormMail ESMTP id 34524.1495962979; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:34:59 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p8L5YsMd036520; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:34:54 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from fu.xihua@zte.com.cn) To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 Message-ID: From: fu.xihua@zte.com.cn Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:34:53 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-09-21 13:34:55, Serialize complete at 2011-09-21 13:34:55 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 001EAB7D48257912_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn p8L5YsMd036520 Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:32:40 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 001EAB7D48257912_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Yes/Support Best Regards, Xihua Fu ZTE Corporation -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 8:38 PM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce --=_alternative 001EAB7D48257912_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Yes/Support


Best Regards,

Xihua Fu

ZTE Corporation

-----Original Message-----
From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 8:38 PM
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06

Hi PCE WG.

The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed
several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for
adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to
this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D
is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you
are expected to clarify.

Thank you,

JP & Julien

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce --=_alternative 001EAB7D48257912_=-- From daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com Tue Sep 20 23:41:20 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27AB921F8C61 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:41:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.413 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.186, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 50A7IF+y3yP5 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:41:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (mailgw9.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5450521F8C55 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 23:41:18 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb39-b7bfdae000005125-35-4e7987a195a9 Received: from esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 3B.6C.20773.1A7897E4; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:43:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.84]) by esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.81]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:43:40 +0200 From: Daniele Ceccarelli To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:43:39 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-Index: Acx3p4xszgAzQYW/TICtI1Ybpv8z8wAgiiVg Message-ID: References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: it-IT, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:41:20 -0000 Yes/Support BR Daniele=20 -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julie= n Meuric Sent: marted=EC 20 settembre 2011 17.08 To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed sever= al times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting dr= aft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message = to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundat= ion to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clar= ify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From ogondio@tid.es Wed Sep 21 00:45:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1641221F8B88 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:45:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.81 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.81 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HMp1VASvtS9j for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tidos.tid.es (tidos.tid.es [195.235.93.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5186421F8BBA for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbrightmailg01.hi.inet (sbrightmailg01.hi.inet [10.95.64.104]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV002JP4B51V@tid.hi.inet> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:47:29 +0200 (MEST) Received: from tid (tid.hi.inet [10.95.64.10]) by sbrightmailg01.hi.inet (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 74.85.06659.CCE897E4; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:14:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from correo.tid.es (mailhost.hi.inet [10.95.64.100]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPS id <0LRV002JK4B41V@tid.hi.inet> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:47:28 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCLU2K7.hi.inet ([10.95.67.65]) by htcasmad1.hi.inet ([192.168.0.1]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:47:28 +0200 Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:47:26 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Oscar_Gonz=E1lez_de_Dios?= In-reply-to: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-language: es-ES Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Accept-Language: es-ES, en-US Thread-topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-index: Acx3p43lVmKnCBnzSv++iALT8l4RTwAiwQFQ acceptlanguage: es-ES, en-US X-AuditID: 0a5f4068-b7b3dae000001a03-3d-4e798eccfedb X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprKKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXCFe/ApXumr9LP4MV7QYum+zfYHRg9liz5 yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVcfx+J3PBVc6K3ne9bA2Mf9i7GDk5JARMJD4s38IGYYtJXLi3 Hsjm4hAS2Mgo0X/jFZTznVHi+ukmRpAqIYFGRon9C7RBbBYBVYkHO+Yzg9hsAg4S6xb1gk0S FrCT2LZ3GROIzSmgJdFzsA3MFhHwlvh27REriM0r4CnRNqWbDcIWlPgx+R4LiM0soCPR+/0b M4QtLjHn10RWCFtb4sm7C2A2o4CsxMrzpxkhZtpLfNnQCTXfSGLTlZssEDUyEv+X72WB+ExA Ysme88wQtqjEy8f/WCF+0ZR4ffQ56wRGsVlIzpiF5IxZSM6YheSMBYwsqxjFipOKMtMzSnIT M3PSDQz1MjL1MvNSSzYxQuIlYwfj8p0qhxgFOBiVeHgV11f4CbEmlhVX5h5ilORgUhLldZ9S 6SfEl5SfUpmRWJwRX1Sak1p8iFGCg1lJhHf5LKBy3pTEyqrUonyYlAwHh5IE7/upQG2CRanp qRVpmTnApACTZuLgBGnnAWovA6nhLS5IzC3OTIfIn2JU5fjb23KCUYglLz8vVUqctwSkSACk KKM0D27OK0ZxoIOFee1AsjzAtAY34RXQcCag4UqFYMNLEhFSUg2MJa5/Gywvdv7nYtZWlJAw uhTZWF5QMu+voP6Dp6/0ngudij5Xoa/Imc2c08ea7mui+i6u9NNO1g+uKXXTxeJzpA/IMiob PxOr+lA8peLK7aUzHLfUsP9dtOVF/r2Uy4f//nD5uzAi8p16xVdHies2at42Fxlu3rmeN//u gv7fGQ+cBUocIziVWIozEg21mIuKEwG0Qbg1KAMAAA== References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:45:03 -0000 Support, Best Regards, Oscar >-----Mensaje original----- >De: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de >Julien Meuric >Enviado el: martes, 20 de septiembre de 2011 17:08 >Para: pce@ietf.org >Asunto: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 > >Hi PCE WG. > >The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed seve= ral >times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draf= t- >king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to >express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundatio= n to >address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. > >Thank you, > >JP & Julien > >_______________________________________________ >Pce mailing list >Pce@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nu= estra pol=EDtica de env=EDo y recepci=F3n de correo electr=F3nico en el enl= ace situado m=E1s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and re= ceive email on the basis of the terms set out at. http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx From g.carrozzo@nextworks.it Wed Sep 21 00:48:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46CC21F8520 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:48:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.413 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6SZBO2yPD0Uw for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:48:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mercurio.nextworks.it (unknown [213.182.68.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DDE1321F852E for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:48:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercurio.nextworks.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01793304005 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:51:28 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at nextworks.it Received: from mercurio.nextworks.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercurio.nextworks.it [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fe+vhrOsh6f9 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:51:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [10.0.3.2]) by mercurio.nextworks.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17947304004 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:51:27 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E799778.4060402@nextworks.it> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:51:20 +0200 From: Gino Carrozzo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pce@ietf.org References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:48:59 -0000 support Gino Carrozzo On 20/09/2011 17.08, Julien Meuric wrote: > Hi PCE WG. > > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed > several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for > adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to > this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D > is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you > are expected to clarify. > > Thank you, > > JP & Julien > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > From huawei.danli@huawei.com Wed Sep 21 01:04:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB3EA21F8C7F for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:04:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.424 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.424 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.175, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SaAeniIwVcD1 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1195C21F8C7C for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV00LUT56E3V@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:06:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV00KYV548UW@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:06:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml208-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AEB86414; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:06:11 +0800 Received: from SZXEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.59) by szxeml208-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.60) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:05:55 +0800 Received: from l00037133 (10.70.77.146) by szxeml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:05:54 +0800 Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:05:53 +0800 From: Dan Li X-Originating-IP: [10.70.77.146] To: Julien Meuric , pce@ietf.org Message-id: <00a601cc7835$49a06530$924d460a@china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3664 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3664 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:04:55 -0000 Support! Dan Li ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julien Meuric" To: Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:08 PM Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 > Hi PCE WG. > > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed > several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for > adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to > this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D > is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you > are expected to clarify. > > Thank you, > > JP & Julien > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com Wed Sep 21 03:22:03 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5271021F85D1 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 03:22:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vAwVO1VPvn0C for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 03:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5079421F8508 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 03:21:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8LAOGs2007869; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:24:17 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.120]) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:24:11 -0400 From: Meral Shirazipour To: Julien Meuric Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:24:10 -0400 Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-Index: Acx3p5y4N2Zf44VISKys/VH0rsIbkwAoO6eA Message-ID: <25DC600D0CC1F2479C7053ADEB93004E67B81B076A@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 10:22:03 -0000 Hi, support. BR, Meral > -----Original Message----- > From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On=20 > Behalf Of Julien Meuric > Sent: September-20-11 11:08 > To: pce@ietf.org > Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 >=20 > Hi PCE WG. >=20 > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long,=20 > discussed several times and was pending the charter update.=20 > This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06=20 > as WG document. Please reply to this message to express=20 > either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good=20 > foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you=20 > are expected to clarify. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > JP & Julien >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > = From huaimo.chen@huawei.com Wed Sep 21 05:18:17 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF05C21F8B78 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:18:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.544 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.544 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L3B-lyboDkSK for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:18:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usaga04-in.huawei.com (usaga04-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A74B21F8C0C for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:18:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (usaga04-in [172.18.4.101]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV00CEGGYK7B@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:20:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.18.4.104]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV003N8GYK1L@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:20:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:20:44 -0700 Received: from DFWEML503-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.103]) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.151]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 05:20:43 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:20:40 +0000 From: Huaimo Chen In-reply-to: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.212.244.192] To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D4104998C5@dfweml503-mbx.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Thread-topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-index: AQHMd6hYE7wYxmf6/UaSWVXsu8a3eJVXwk1Q X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:18:17 -0000 Support! Best Regards, Huaimo -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:08 AM To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From quintin.zhao@huawei.com Wed Sep 21 06:24:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95EEC21F8C53 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:24:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QJVzQu5uBLDQ for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usaga04-in.huawei.com (usaga04-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E572721F8B5F for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (usaga04-in [172.18.4.101]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV00CKSK0JBU@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:26:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.18.4.104]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRV00I25K0JJM@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:26:43 -0500 (CDT) Received: from DFWEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:26:38 -0700 Received: from QZHAO (10.212.246.232) by DFWEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:26:42 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 09:26:36 -0400 From: Quintin Zhao In-reply-to: X-Originating-IP: [10.212.246.232] To: pce@ietf.org Message-id: <001c01cc7862$17b41df0$471c59d0$%zhao@huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: zh-cn Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: Acx4M00nhMYPszoLRpSEXx6//hEbLgALmNig References: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 06:49:10 -0700 Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:24:16 -0000 Yes/support! Thanks, Quintin -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric Sent: 20 September 2011 16:08 To: pce@ietf.org Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Hi PCE WG. The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which you are expected to clarify. Thank you, JP & Julien _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce _ *** From zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn Thu Sep 22 00:03:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD1821F8D21; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:03:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -96.77 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.77 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.549, BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h2sLXP7dOzzJ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 607DA21F8D23; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 466213280467362; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:04:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.30.3.21] by [192.168.168.16] with StormMail ESMTP id 6381.3335015479; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:05:57 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse02.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id p8M75f4d085984; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:05:41 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn) In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> To: Julien Meuric MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: EA7B82A9:B3029E4B-48257913:0026EE0F; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007 Message-ID: From: zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:05:37 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.1FP4|July 25, 2010) at 2011-09-22 15:05:43, Serialize complete at 2011-09-22 15:05:43 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0026F9B248257913_=" X-MAIL: mse02.zte.com.cn p8M75f4d085984 Cc: pce-bounces@ietf.org, "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 07:03:54 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0026F9B248257913_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 WWVhaC9TdXBwb3J0DQoNCkIuUi4NCg0KRmVpDQoNCg0KDQpKdWxpZW4gTWV1cmljIDxqdWxpZW4u bWV1cmljQG9yYW5nZS5jb20+IA0Kt6K8/sjLOiAgcGNlLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCjIwMTEt MDktMjAgMjM6MDgNCg0KytW8/sjLDQoicGNlQGlldGYub3JnIiA8cGNlQGlldGYub3JnPg0Ks63L zQ0KDQrW98ziDQpbUGNlXSBBZG9wdGlvbiBvZiBkcmFmdC1raW5nLXBjZS1oaWVyYXJjaHktZndr LTA2DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpIaSBQQ0UgV0cuDQoNClRoZSBmcmFtZXdvcmsgZm9yIGhpZXJhcmNo aWNhbCBQQ0UgaGFzIGJlZW4gdGhlcmUgZm9yIGxvbmcsIGRpc2N1c3NlZCANCnNldmVyYWwgdGlt ZXMgYW5kIHdhcyBwZW5kaW5nIHRoZSBjaGFydGVyIHVwZGF0ZS4gVGhpcyBpcyBhIHBvbGwgZm9y IA0KYWRvcHRpbmcgZHJhZnQta2luZy1wY2UtaGllcmFyY2h5LWZ3ay0wNiBhcyBXRyBkb2N1bWVu dC4gUGxlYXNlIHJlcGx5IHRvIA0KdGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlIHRvIGV4cHJlc3MgZWl0aGVyIHlvdXIg c3VwcG9ydCwgaS5lLiB5b3UgY29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIEktRCANCmlzIGEgZ29vZCBmb3VuZGF0aW9u IHRvIGFkZHJlc3MgdGhlIGlzc3VlLCBvciB5b3VyIG9iamVjdGlvbiwgd2hpY2ggeW91IA0KYXJl IGV4cGVjdGVkIHRvIGNsYXJpZnkuDQoNClRoYW5rIHlvdSwNCg0KSlAgJiBKdWxpZW4NCg0KX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NClBjZSBtYWlsaW5n IGxpc3QNClBjZUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5m by9wY2UNCg0KDQoNCg== --=_alternative 0026F9B248257913_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPlllYWgvU3VwcG9ydDwvZm9udD4N Cjxicj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+Qi5SLjwvZm9udD4NCjxi cj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+RmVpPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPg0K PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPTEwMCU+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0 aD0zNSU+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxiPkp1bGllbiBNZXVyaWMgJmx0 O2p1bGllbi5tZXVyaWNAb3JhbmdlLmNvbSZndDs8L2I+DQo8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6 ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPreivP7IyzogJm5ic3A7cGNlLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8 L2ZvbnQ+DQo8cD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+MjAxMS0wOS0yMCAyMzow ODwvZm9udD4NCjx0ZCB3aWR0aD02NCU+DQo8dGFibGUgd2lkdGg9MTAwJT4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249 dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPGRpdiBhbGlnbj1yaWdodD48Zm9udCBzaXplPTEgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJp ZiI+ytW8/sjLPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPHRkPjxmb250IHNpemU9MSBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlm Ij4mcXVvdDtwY2VAaWV0Zi5vcmcmcXVvdDsgJmx0O3BjZUBpZXRmLm9yZyZndDs8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8 dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9 InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPrOty808L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+DQo8dHIgdmFsaWduPXRvcD4NCjx0 ZD4NCjxkaXYgYWxpZ249cmlnaHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPtb3zOI8 L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8dGQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0xIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPltQY2VdIEFk b3B0aW9uIG9mIGRyYWZ0LWtpbmctcGNlLWhpZXJhcmNoeS1md2stMDY8L2ZvbnQ+PC90YWJsZT4N Cjxicj4NCjx0YWJsZT4NCjx0ciB2YWxpZ249dG9wPg0KPHRkPg0KPHRkPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YnI+ PC90YWJsZT4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj48dHQ+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yPkhpIFBDRSBXRy48YnI+ DQo8YnI+DQpUaGUgZnJhbWV3b3JrIGZvciBoaWVyYXJjaGljYWwgUENFIGhhcyBiZWVuIHRoZXJl IGZvciBsb25nLCBkaXNjdXNzZWQgPGJyPg0Kc2V2ZXJhbCB0aW1lcyBhbmQgd2FzIHBlbmRpbmcg dGhlIGNoYXJ0ZXIgdXBkYXRlLiBUaGlzIGlzIGEgcG9sbCBmb3IgPGJyPg0KYWRvcHRpbmcgZHJh ZnQta2luZy1wY2UtaGllcmFyY2h5LWZ3ay0wNiBhcyBXRyBkb2N1bWVudC4gUGxlYXNlIHJlcGx5 IHRvDQo8YnI+DQp0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UgdG8gZXhwcmVzcyBlaXRoZXIgeW91ciBzdXBwb3J0LCBp LmUuIHlvdSBjb25zaWRlciB0aGUgSS1EDQo8YnI+DQppcyBhIGdvb2QgZm91bmRhdGlvbiB0byBh ZGRyZXNzIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSwgb3IgeW91ciBvYmplY3Rpb24sIHdoaWNoIHlvdQ0KPGJyPg0KYXJl IGV4cGVjdGVkIHRvIGNsYXJpZnkuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KVGhhbmsgeW91LDxicj4NCjxicj4NCkpQ ICZhbXA7IEp1bGllbjxicj4NCjxicj4NCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KUGNlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxicj4NClBjZUBpZXRmLm9yZzxi cj4NCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vcGNlPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0K PC9mb250PjwvdHQ+DQo8YnI+DQo= --=_alternative 0026F9B248257913_=-- From cyril.margaria@nsn.com Thu Sep 22 00:26:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E468121F8A58 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:26:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.543 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.543 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k7TQPpXHxaox for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:26:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EDE321F8772 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8M7TH3w025235 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:29:17 +0200 Received: from demuexc022.nsn-intra.net (demuexc022.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.35]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8M7TBaH025833; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:29:16 +0200 Received: from DEMUEXC012.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.23]) by demuexc022.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:29:10 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:29:09 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-Index: Acx3p4x7pU6bSPWdQxqZ74Rn/HUA+gBUbvzg References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> From: "Margaria, Cyril (NSN - DE/Munich)" To: "ext Julien Meuric" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Sep 2011 07:29:10.0773 (UTC) FILETIME=[522C5A50:01CC78F9] Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 07:26:49 -0000 Hi,=20 Yes/Support=20 BR Cyril > -----Original Message----- > From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > ext Julien Meuric > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:08 PM > To: pce@ietf.org > Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 >=20 > Hi PCE WG. >=20 > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed > several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for > adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply > to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the > I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which > you are expected to clarify. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > JP & Julien >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From olivier.dugeon@orange.com Thu Sep 22 09:20:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E4B21F8C08 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:20:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JxRBANq9btqA for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:20:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE8C21F8C07 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EF35858007 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:31:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0A9858001 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:31:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.44]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:22:35 +0200 Received: from [10.193.11.220] ([10.193.11.220]) by ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:22:35 +0200 Message-ID: <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:22:35 +0200 From: Olivier Dugeon Organization: Orange Labs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110906 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julien Meuric References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Sep 2011 16:22:35.0413 (UTC) FILETIME=[D66CDC50:01CC7943] Cc: "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 16:21:36 -0000 Hello Julie, all, I support the draft, but I want to take the opportunity to raise a=20 common point between this draft, BRPC and inter-domain stuff in general. IMHO, I think that it is missing something in the different proposal to=20 compute inter-domain tunnel. This is related to the TED. Indeed, there=20 is no proposal to collect suitable information that could help the PCE=20 (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to select (compute) the AS path, and so select the = better (regarding the request) peer PCE. Such information, like TE of=20 the peering point between two ASs, are mandatory if we want to select=20 alternate AS path than the one announced by BGP. If such mandatory=20 information are out of scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid that, for me, their=20 is no difference between the BRPC and H-PCE, instead on how PCE are=20 cooperate. The result will be the same in term of path computation. Is this make sense for the PCE WG and if yes, do you think it is=20 suitable to propose a draft for that purpose (we have some ideas for=20 that here) ? Regards, Olivier Le 09/20/11 17:08, Julien Meuric a =E9crit : > Hi PCE WG. > > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed=20 > several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for=20 > adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply=20 > to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the=20 > I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection,=20 > which you are expected to clarify. > > Thank you, > > JP & Julien > > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > --=20 *Olivier Dugeon* FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM Senior research engineer, QoS and network control Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470 Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85 olivier.dugeon@orange.com From ramon.casellas@cttc.es Thu Sep 22 11:41:15 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FBC11F0C6A for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:41:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.290, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Om+KpuNHRo4C for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:41:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aquila.cttc.es (aquila.cttc.es [84.88.62.230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C44491F0C3C for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:41:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leo (leo.cttc.es [84.88.62.208]) by aquila.cttc.es (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8MKkbuh032765; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 22:46:39 +0200 Received: from 10.240.246.148 (212-166-167-78.red-acceso.airtel.net [212.166.167.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by leo (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46F202010F; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:43:29 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 17:15:57 +0200 Message-ID: From: Ramon Casellas To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.4 (leo [0.0.0.0]); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:43:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 84.88.62.230 Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:41:15 -0000 WWVzLCBzdXBwb3J0ClRoYW5rcywKUi4= From jpv@cisco.com Thu Sep 22 20:36:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A571F0C3B for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:36:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -108.994 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-108.994 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.473, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=2.077, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LPoQGrrNNdUA for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F207A11E80A1 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:36:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=jpv@cisco.com; l=8226; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1316749146; x=1317958746; h=from:subject:date:message-id:cc:to:mime-version; bh=btbrmd6DOg6DtSnKM83VBnd9KTJ04OQUS2Q3jYYloKA=; b=BY0kxwnORTNoyDrCdTloQCQxS/kMn3atsJgfeuxMWtFDq9j3FhxwoYFu xjRDvbUDxx9sMYK+scmuhCG39/3Y4kxjiCOIaL7V0AEdhOX43zicj36Pz 45ILu4QGFVBzsYqJMUe1pzNreotdvgTkiVBrJ1l/PigzkqBuNyLQffyc+ Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmEHAAr/e06Q/khM/2dsb2JhbABCgk2lPGgQgWwBZoFaGYdcllsBniaGHWAEh2+LYYUfCYwU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,427,1312156800"; d="scan'208,217";a="116825171" Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Sep 2011 03:39:03 +0000 Received: from xbh-ams-101.cisco.com (xbh-ams-101.cisco.com [144.254.74.71]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p8N3d3bV026062; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:39:03 GMT Received: from xfe-ams-201.cisco.com ([144.254.231.95]) by xbh-ams-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 05:39:03 +0200 Received: from [192.168.0.33] ([10.55.82.192]) by xfe-ams-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 05:39:02 +0200 From: JP Vasseur Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5BF03705-660B-4138-823D-C7E7EC223129" Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:39:00 +0800 Message-Id: <03DBC908-4CFB-4220-898F-774A7B432133@cisco.com> To: pce@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Sep 2011 03:39:02.0650 (UTC) FILETIME=[564DBDA0:01CC79A2] Cc: Julien Meuric Subject: [Pce] PCE WG IETF-82 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:36:34 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5BF03705-660B-4138-823D-C7E7EC223129 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dear all, Important dates: 2011-08-15 (Week of): IETF Online Registration opens. 2011-08-15 (Monday): Working Group and BOF scheduling begins. To request = a Working Group session, use the IETF Meeting Session Request Tool. 2011-09-26 (Monday): Cutoff date for requests to schedule Working Group = meetings at 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). To request a Working Group session, = use the IETF Meeting Session Request Tool. 2011- 10-03 (Monday): Cutoff date for BOF proposal requests to Area = Directors at 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). To request a BOF, please see = instructions on Requesting a BOF. 2011-10-06 (Thursday): Cutoff date for Area Directors to approve BOFs at = 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). 2011-10-13 (Thursday): Preliminary agenda published for comment. 2011-10-17 (Monday): Cutoff date for requests to reschedule Working = Group and BOF meetings 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). 2011-10-17 (Monday): Working Group Chair approval for initial document = (Version -00) submissions appreciated by 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). 2011-10-21 (Friday): Final agenda to be published. 2011-10-24 (Monday): Internet Draft Cut-off for initial document (-00) = submission by 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF ID Submission = Tool. 2011-10-31 (Monday): Internet Draft final submission cut-off by 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF ID Submission Tool. 2011-11-02 (Wednesday): Draft Working Group agendas due by 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. 2011-11-04 (Friday): Early Bird registration and payment cut-off at = 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). 2011-11-07 (Monday): Revised Working Group agendas due by 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. 2011-11-07 (Monday): Registration cancellation cut-off at 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC). 2011-11-11 (Friday): Final Pre-Registration and Pre-Payment cut-off at = 17:00 local meeting time. 2011-11-13 - 2011-11-18: 82nd IETF Meeting in Taipei, Taiwan. 2011-12-16 (Friday): Proceedings submission cutoff date by 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. 2012-01-05 (Wednesday): Proceedings submission corrections cutoff date = by 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management = Tool. Please send us your request (should you need a slot) before Oct 31 at = noon ET.=20 ps: for information I won't be able to attend but Julien will be there = to chair the WG meeting. Thanks. JP.= --Apple-Mail=_5BF03705-660B-4138-823D-C7E7EC223129 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Dear = all,

Important dates:

  • 2011-08-15 (Week of): IETF Online = Registration opens.
  • = IETF Meeting Session Request Tool.
  • 2011-09-26 = (Monday): Cutoff date for requests to schedule Working = Group meetings at 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). To request a Working Group = session, use the = IETF Meeting Session Request Tool.
  • 2011- 10-03 = (Monday): Cutoff date for BOF proposal requests to Area = Directors at 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC). To request a BOF, please see = instructions on Requesting a = BOF.
  • 2011-10-13 = (Thursday): Preliminary agenda published for = comment.
  • 2011-10-17 = (Monday): Working Group Chair approval for initial = document (Version -00) submissions appreciated by 17:00 PT (00:00 = UTC).
  • 2011-10-24 = (Monday): Internet Draft Cut-off for initial document = (-00) submission by 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF ID Submission = Tool.
  • 2011-10-31 = (Monday): Internet Draft final submission cut-off by 17:00 = PT (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF ID Submission = Tool.
  • IETF = Meeting Materials Management Tool.
  • 2011-11-04 = (Friday): Early Bird registration and payment cut-off at = 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC).
  • IETF = Meeting Materials Management Tool.
  • 2011-11-07 = (Monday): Registration cancellation cut-off at 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC).
  • 2011-11-13 - 2011-11-18: 82nd IETF = Meeting in Taipei, Taiwan.
  • 2011-12-16 = (Friday): Proceedings submission cutoff date by 17:00 PT = (00:00 UTC), upload using IETF = Meeting Materials Management Tool.
  • 2012-01-05 (Wednesday): Proceedings = submission corrections cutoff date by 17:00 PT (00:00 UTC), upload = using IETF = Meeting Materials Management = Tool.

Please send = us your request (should you need a slot) before Oct 31 at noon = ET. 

ps: for information I won't be able = to attend but Julien will be there to chair the WG = meeting.

Thanks.

JP.= --Apple-Mail=_5BF03705-660B-4138-823D-C7E7EC223129-- From nurit.sprecher@nsn.com Fri Sep 23 00:27:01 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4B121F85B1 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:27:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.886 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.713, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YWYtA1mdBvyr for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:27:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D6421F84C3 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8N7TX0p008221 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:29:33 +0200 Received: from demuexc025.nsn-intra.net (demuexc025.nsn-intra.net [10.159.32.12]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8N7TXtJ003170; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:29:33 +0200 Received: from DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.25]) by demuexc025.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:29:23 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:29:23 +0200 Message-ID: <077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A53264047688F9@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-Index: Acx3p4x7pU6bSPWdQxqZ74Rn/HUA+gBUbvzgADCrJGA= References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" To: "ext Julien Meuric" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Sep 2011 07:29:23.0742 (UTC) FILETIME=[845103E0:01CC79C2] Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 07:27:01 -0000 Yes/support Nurit > -----Original Message----- > From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > ext Julien Meuric > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:08 PM > To: pce@ietf.org > Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 >=20 > Hi PCE WG. >=20 > The framework for hierarchical PCE has been there for long, discussed > several times and was pending the charter update. This is a poll for > adopting draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 as WG document. Please reply > to this message to express either your support, i.e. you consider the > I-D is a good foundation to address the issue, or your objection, which > you are expected to clarify. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > JP & Julien >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce From ramon.casellas@cttc.es Fri Sep 23 01:51:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CB7B21F8573 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 01:51:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8HxtxE8+pTJd for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 01:51:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Scorpius.cttc.es (scorpius.cttc.es [84.88.62.197]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD31721F85AA for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 01:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castor (postfix@castor.cttc.es [84.88.62.196]) by Scorpius.cttc.es (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8N8sHWl008319 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:54:23 +0200 Received: from [84.88.61.50] (pcrcasellas.cttc.es [84.88.61.50]) by castor (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B102FC23C for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:54:18 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E7C4971.10002@cttc.es> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:55:13 +0200 From: Ramon Casellas Organization: CTTC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pce@ietf.org References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> In-Reply-To: <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (castor); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:54:18 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 84.88.62.197 Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 08:51:59 -0000 Dear Olivier, all Please see inline El 22/09/2011 18:22, Olivier Dugeon escribió: > > IMHO, I think that it is missing something in the different proposal > to compute inter-domain tunnel. This is related to the TED. Indeed, > there is no proposal to collect suitable information that could help > the PCE (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to select (compute) the AS path, and so > select the better (regarding the request) peer PCE. Such information, > like TE of the peering point between two ASs, are mandatory if we want > to select alternate AS path than the one announced by BGP. If such > mandatory information are out of scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid that, for > me, their is no difference between the BRPC and H-PCE, instead on how > PCE are cooperate. The result will be the same in term of path > computation. > As you may know, the issue of TED management and, in particular, TED management in the context of multi-domain path computation is raised regularly (including myself!) and no consensus seems to be reached. To some extent, I understand the (architectural and functional) idea of keeping TED management somehow decoupled from the actual path computation function, as it is done in the context of single domain path computation, where the way the PCE obtains the TED is out of the scope (and in some sense, orthogonal). However, I believe that in some cases both functions (path computation and TED management) are slightly coupled (border node identification, endpoint localization and topology aggregation for domain sequence selection, to name a few in which an IGP-based TED may not be sufficient). For what is worth, an approach that we proposed in the past (as well as other implementers) has been to use PCNtf with embedded OSPF-TE LSUs / LSAs (or XML files or any other encoding) TED "slices". This approach -- completely non-standard -- can be used for both wrapping and forwarding InterAS links [RFC5392] -- which, I agree with you, seems relevant for a more efficient selection of the AS path and would seem to address your requirement. This is briefly mentioned in Fatai's and Dan's draft-zhang-pcep-hpce -- the same approach can be used to wrap any other topological information. We did in a research project, including "virtual links or nodes" for topology aggregation (i.e. full-mesh) in H-PCE. In private communications I got the feeling that this is somehow "frowned upon" ;) and that AS peering and connectivity is managed at another (i.e. managed) level. > Is this make sense for the PCE WG and if yes, do you think it is > suitable to propose a draft for that purpose (we have some ideas for > that here) ? I am not against such a proposal, since it is easier and simpler to "stick to a common way of doing things", although it is difficult to decide and I would understand the WG position against it, if it was the case. Nonetheless I, for one, would be interested in hearing your ideas :) Thanks Ramon -- Ramon Casellas, Ph.D. Research Associate - Optical Networking Area -- http://wikiona.cttc.es CTTC - Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya, PMT Ed B4 Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss, 7 - 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona) - Spain Tel.: +34 93 645 29 00 -- Fax. +34 93 645 29 01 From zhangfatai@huawei.com Fri Sep 23 18:23:14 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4218521F8BB8 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 18:23:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.922, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F9-6Yn2kzNhQ for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 18:23:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EB4E21F8BB2 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 18:23:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LS000BPI6MZMP@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:25:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LS000BT86MWSO@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:25:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml205-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADW01515; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:25:46 +0800 Received: from SZXEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.31) by szxeml205-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.57) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:25:38 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.142]) by szxeml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.31]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:25:41 +0800 Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 01:25:40 +0000 From: Zhangfatai In-reply-to: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.70.76.157] To: Julien Meuric , "pce@ietf.org" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-index: AQHMd6hUsLpXGJCbrEmy7Rd+12ZPhpVbwktw X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 01:23:14 -0000 WWVzLCBzdXBwb3J0Lg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNClRoYW5rcw0KwqANCkZhdGFpDQoNCg0KLS0tLS1Pcmln aW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IHBjZS1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86cGNl LWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBKdWxpZW4gTWV1cmljDQpTZW50OiAyMDEx 5bm0OeaciDIw5pelIDIzOjA4DQpUbzogcGNlQGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBbUGNlXSBBZG9w dGlvbiBvZiBkcmFmdC1raW5nLXBjZS1oaWVyYXJjaHktZndrLTA2DQoNCkhpIFBDRSBXRy4NCg0K VGhlIGZyYW1ld29yayBmb3IgaGllcmFyY2hpY2FsIFBDRSBoYXMgYmVlbiB0aGVyZSBmb3IgbG9u ZywgZGlzY3Vzc2VkIA0Kc2V2ZXJhbCB0aW1lcyBhbmQgd2FzIHBlbmRpbmcgdGhlIGNoYXJ0ZXIg dXBkYXRlLiBUaGlzIGlzIGEgcG9sbCBmb3IgDQphZG9wdGluZyBkcmFmdC1raW5nLXBjZS1oaWVy YXJjaHktZndrLTA2IGFzIFdHIGRvY3VtZW50LiBQbGVhc2UgcmVwbHkgdG8gDQp0aGlzIG1lc3Nh Z2UgdG8gZXhwcmVzcyBlaXRoZXIgeW91ciBzdXBwb3J0LCBpLmUuIHlvdSBjb25zaWRlciB0aGUg SS1EIA0KaXMgYSBnb29kIGZvdW5kYXRpb24gdG8gYWRkcmVzcyB0aGUgaXNzdWUsIG9yIHlvdXIg b2JqZWN0aW9uLCB3aGljaCB5b3UgDQphcmUgZXhwZWN0ZWQgdG8gY2xhcmlmeS4NCg0KVGhhbmsg eW91LA0KDQpKUCAmIEp1bGllbg0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KUGNlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KUGNlQGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3BjZQ0K From olivier.dugeon@orange.com Mon Sep 26 06:10:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C711F21F8C5A for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 06:10:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7kQtF6vq419a for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 06:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF8A721F84D7 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 06:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 4EFFB8D0005; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:13:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.47]) by p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4807E8D0003; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:13:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.44]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:13:03 +0200 Received: from renot.local ([10.193.116.71]) by ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:13:01 +0200 Message-ID: <4E807A5C.3050402@orange.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:13:00 +0200 From: Olivier Dugeon Organization: France Telecom R&D User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ramon Casellas References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> <4E7C4971.10002@cttc.es> In-Reply-To: <4E7C4971.10002@cttc.es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Sep 2011 13:13:01.0548 (UTC) FILETIME=[04B9CAC0:01CC7C4E] Cc: pce@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:10:54 -0000 Hello Ramon, all, Thanks for your comment. I'm agree with you and I just try to reactivate = the debate too. IMHO, if we want PCE do a good job, i.e. not only finding the shortest=20 path, but also the one which fit optimally the request we need first to=20 compute the AS path to know with which PCE I will collaborate. This AS=20 path is not necessary the shortest one or the one provide by BGP. For=20 such AS path Computation, PCE needs suitable information i.e. at least=20 TE of the peering point. Exchange such information is more a routing space and a problem of floodi= ng. Now the question is: can we used existing protocol (IGP-TE are good=20 candidate) or do we modify PCEP for that purpose ? Regards, Olivier Le 23/09/11 10:55, Ramon Casellas a =E9crit : > Dear Olivier, all > > Please see inline > > > El 22/09/2011 18:22, Olivier Dugeon escribi=F3: >> >> IMHO, I think that it is missing something in the different proposal=20 >> to compute inter-domain tunnel. This is related to the TED. Indeed,=20 >> there is no proposal to collect suitable information that could help=20 >> the PCE (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to select (compute) the AS path, and so = >> select the better (regarding the request) peer PCE. Such information, = >> like TE of the peering point between two ASs, are mandatory if we=20 >> want to select alternate AS path than the one announced by BGP. If=20 >> such mandatory information are out of scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid=20 >> that, for me, their is no difference between the BRPC and H-PCE,=20 >> instead on how PCE are cooperate. The result will be the same in term = >> of path computation. >> > > As you may know, the issue of TED management and, in particular, TED=20 > management in the context of multi-domain path computation is raised=20 > regularly (including myself!) and no consensus seems to be reached. > > To some extent, I understand the (architectural and functional) idea=20 > of keeping TED management somehow decoupled from the actual path=20 > computation function, as it is done in the context of single domain=20 > path computation, where the way the PCE obtains the TED is out of the=20 > scope (and in some sense, orthogonal). > > However, I believe that in some cases both functions (path computation = > and TED management) are slightly coupled (border node identification,=20 > endpoint localization and topology aggregation for domain sequence=20 > selection, to name a few in which an IGP-based TED may not be=20 > sufficient). For what is worth, an approach that we proposed in the=20 > past (as well as other implementers) has been to use PCNtf with=20 > embedded OSPF-TE LSUs / LSAs (or XML files or any other encoding) TED = > "slices". > > This approach -- completely non-standard -- can be used for both=20 > wrapping and forwarding InterAS links [RFC5392] -- which, I agree with = > you, seems relevant for a more efficient selection of the AS path and=20 > would seem to address your requirement. This is briefly mentioned in=20 > Fatai's and Dan's draft-zhang-pcep-hpce -- the same approach can be=20 > used to wrap any other topological information. We did in a research=20 > project, including "virtual links or nodes" for topology aggregation=20 > (i.e. full-mesh) in H-PCE. In private communications I got the feeling = > that this is somehow "frowned upon" ;) and that AS peering and=20 > connectivity is managed at another (i.e. managed) level. > > >> Is this make sense for the PCE WG and if yes, do you think it is=20 >> suitable to propose a draft for that purpose (we have some ideas for=20 >> that here) ? > > I am not against such a proposal, since it is easier and simpler to=20 > "stick to a common way of doing things", although it is difficult to=20 > decide and I would understand the WG position against it, if it was=20 > the case. Nonetheless I, for one, would be interested in hearing your=20 > ideas :) > > Thanks > > Ramon > --=20 Orange *Olivier Dugeon* FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM Senior research engineer, QoS and network control Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470 Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85 Olivier.Dugeon@orange-ftgroup.com France Telecom From ogondio@tid.es Mon Sep 26 07:19:36 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDC2F21F8D34 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 07:19:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.405 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.405 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.406, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_NAIL=2.3, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sI1m3cuOj9pG for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 07:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tidos.tid.es (tidos.tid.es [195.235.93.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EEBB21F8D32 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 07:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbrightmailg01.hi.inet (sbrightmailg01.hi.inet [10.95.64.104]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LS4007E6VX47S@tid.hi.inet> for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:22:16 +0200 (MEST) Received: from tid (tid.hi.inet [10.95.64.10]) by sbrightmailg01.hi.inet (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id A5.B6.08217.89A808E4; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:22:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from correo.tid.es (mailhost.hi.inet [10.95.64.100]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPS id <0LS4007E1VX47S@tid.hi.inet> for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:22:16 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCLU2K7.hi.inet ([10.95.67.65]) by htcasmad2.hi.inet ([192.168.0.2]) with mapi; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:22:16 +0200 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:22:15 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Oscar_Gonz=E1lez_de_Dios?= In-reply-to: <4E807A5C.3050402@orange.com> To: Olivier Dugeon , Ramon Casellas Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-language: es-ES Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Accept-Language: es-ES, en-US Thread-topic: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-index: Acx8Th81cQlFrml0Sk2KoAlrmBvP6QAAJSqw acceptlanguage: es-ES, en-US X-AuditID: 0a5f4068-b7f816d000002019-c3-4e808a9831c1 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrGKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXCFe/ApTujq8HPYMdeY4um+zfYHRg9liz5 yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVcWjlbJaC584VL5btZGtgnGvWxcjBISFgIjH9QWUXIyeQKSZx 4d56ti5GLg4hgY2MEusbPjBDON8ZJR7P/s4O4TQySvxuaWAHaWERUJXYMGkLM4jNJuAgsW5R LxuILSwQLLHr3lZGEJtTQEti74SNLCC2iECkxPLGmYwgm5kFFCXe3eYFCfMKeEps3/SdFcIW lPgx+R5YObOAjkTv92/MELa4xJxfE1khbG2JJ+8ugNmMArISK8+fBhspIhAi0TlBH2KTkcSL 3t/sECUyEv+X72WBeFJAYsme88wQtqjEy8f/WCHeamCUmNW2j20Co/gsJGfMQnLGLCRnzEJy xgJGllWMYsVJRZnpGSW5iZk56QaGehmZepl5qSWbGCFRlLGDcflOlUOMAhyMSjy8Uhvq/YRY E8uKK3MPMUpyMCmJ8k5va/AT4kvKT6nMSCzOiC8qzUktPsQowcGsJMJr1gSU401JrKxKLcqH SclwcChJ8C7vBEoJFqWmp1akZeYAUwVMmomDE6SdB6h9JUgNb3FBYm5xZjpE/hSjNse3B5tO MHL0Pd96glGIJS8/L1VKnPcSSKkASGlGaR7ctFeM4kBnC/MyA1OZEA8w8cHNeQW0ggloRU5N LciKkkSElFQDo5BFjoHuq2vb01bNmvJ89cmC6T91d/07+0ldqLnpTF3k/CM1Hcv3retu4i14 7zI1aYbOqxmPpTe9rbig++GG/hou97aS+/9cfmtN/dSe8CHmSZbi3gyDc5M7JDrWJH03+V3h VHBe9skGtS1MYWybT2RwVNV++/V48ja/Szf2LbCZfP9sd+qJ/fVKLMUZiYZazEXFiQC6Ser4 OQMAAA== References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> <4E7C4971.10002@cttc.es> <4E807A5C.3050402@orange.com> Cc: "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:19:36 -0000 Hi Ram=F3n, all... First of all, I would like to point out that we may differentiate s= everal environments with different requirements for the multidomain problem= . The PCE is scoped for any kind of network, from transport networks (OTN/S= WON) with a rather limited number of domains, few interconnections, and few= confidentiality issues, transport networks with a large number of domains= , MPLS networks with several administrative domains, and big IP/MPLS networ= ks with a large number of domains with peering agreements. For each of them= , a different solution for the multi-domain path computation may apply. A s= olution may not be scalable for one, but perfect for another. In this WG, e= ach of us has one particular scenario in mind... so we need to clearly scop= e all the contributions/opinions. In my case, I have in mind more the scena= rio of a transport network with a reduced number of domains. In each of the above scenarios, different level of information can = be sent to the entity in charge of computing the end to end path. Thus, I w= ould allow different levels of information exchange, always based on a stan= dard approach, and let each network operator choose the one that better fit= s the needs for the particular case. Thus, there would be a trade-off betwe= en scalability and quality of the computed paths. Said that, if we feel that using current standards are too complex = for one scenario, or are not sufficient, then I would support going for the= necessary extensions, maybe not in PCE WG, but more in the routing related= WGs. If we think that, it is just a matter of specifying how to use curren= t standards to cover the different scenarios, elaborating an informational = RFC would be the best solution. Anyway, I would decouple the needs of the PCEP protocol (that shoul= d be focused on providing a standard way to cover the needs of the interact= ions between PCEs of different domains, or between a H-PCE and PCEs of diff= erent domains, a common way of representing the multidomain path with diffe= rent levels of detail) and how to fill the TED (that includes which informa= tion to send, e.g. summarized information, inter-as information, etc. and t= he protocol to exchange it). So... unless we see that using IGP for feeding the routing informat= ion to the H-PCE is like to crack a nut with a sledgehammer, I would avoid= including in the PCEP protocol the routing information (even though it is = easy to implement), but I agree on specifying how to exchange this informat= ion (with IGP or any other protocol) for particular scenarios. So... if we = demonstrate that having a full IGP stack only brings interoperability probl= ems, adds unnecessary complexity, consumes more resources and does not give= additional value, I would support going to the simple approach of clearly = specifying the LSAs to embed in PCNtf. We need to update soon the draft for the solution of the hierarchic= al PCE, so we must agree on these issues in order to have a common approach= . Finally, I have another doubt... what about the reachability inform= ation when BGP is not used? Ram=F3n proposed, in the scope of WSON networks= , in an OFC research paper, to send the reachability information, that is t= he addresses reachable in a given domain, in a PCNtf as, e.g. IPv4 prefixes= (in a BGP style). This information is needed by the PCE to know which is t= he domain of a given endpoint. Best Regards, =D3scar >-----Mensaje original----- >De: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de >Olivier Dugeon >Enviado el: lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2011 15:13 >Para: Ramon Casellas >CC: pce@ietf.org >Asunto: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy- >fwk-06 > >Hello Ramon, all, > >Thanks for your comment. I'm agree with you and I just try to reactivate t= he >debate too. > >IMHO, if we want PCE do a good job, i.e. not only finding the shortest pat= h, >but also the one which fit optimally the request we need first to compute = the >AS path to know with which PCE I will collaborate. This AS path is not >necessary the shortest one or the one provide by BGP. For such AS path >Computation, PCE needs suitable information i.e. at least TE of the peerin= g >point. >Exchange such information is more a routing space and a problem of floodin= g. > >Now the question is: can we used existing protocol (IGP-TE are good >candidate) or do we modify PCEP for that purpose ? > >Regards, > >Olivier > >Le 23/09/11 10:55, Ramon Casellas a =E9crit : >> Dear Olivier, all >> >> Please see inline >> >> >> El 22/09/2011 18:22, Olivier Dugeon escribi=F3: >>> >>> IMHO, I think that it is missing something in the different proposal >>> to compute inter-domain tunnel. This is related to the TED. Indeed, >>> there is no proposal to collect suitable information that could help >>> the PCE (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to select (compute) the AS path, and so >>> select the better (regarding the request) peer PCE. Such information, >>> like TE of the peering point between two ASs, are mandatory if we >>> want to select alternate AS path than the one announced by BGP. If >>> such mandatory information are out of scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid >>> that, for me, their is no difference between the BRPC and H-PCE, >>> instead on how PCE are cooperate. The result will be the same in term >>> of path computation. >>> >> >> As you may know, the issue of TED management and, in particular, TED >> management in the context of multi-domain path computation is raised >> regularly (including myself!) and no consensus seems to be reached. >> >> To some extent, I understand the (architectural and functional) idea >> of keeping TED management somehow decoupled from the actual path >> computation function, as it is done in the context of single domain >> path computation, where the way the PCE obtains the TED is out of the >> scope (and in some sense, orthogonal). >> >> However, I believe that in some cases both functions (path computation >> and TED management) are slightly coupled (border node identification, >> endpoint localization and topology aggregation for domain sequence >> selection, to name a few in which an IGP-based TED may not be >> sufficient). For what is worth, an approach that we proposed in the >> past (as well as other implementers) has been to use PCNtf with >> embedded OSPF-TE LSUs / LSAs (or XML files or any other encoding) TED >> "slices". >> >> This approach -- completely non-standard -- can be used for both >> wrapping and forwarding InterAS links [RFC5392] -- which, I agree with >> you, seems relevant for a more efficient selection of the AS path and >> would seem to address your requirement. This is briefly mentioned in >> Fatai's and Dan's draft-zhang-pcep-hpce -- the same approach can be >> used to wrap any other topological information. We did in a research >> project, including "virtual links or nodes" for topology aggregation >> (i.e. full-mesh) in H-PCE. In private communications I got the feeling >> that this is somehow "frowned upon" ;) and that AS peering and >> connectivity is managed at another (i.e. managed) level. >> >> >>> Is this make sense for the PCE WG and if yes, do you think it is >>> suitable to propose a draft for that purpose (we have some ideas for >>> that here) ? >> >> I am not against such a proposal, since it is easier and simpler to >> "stick to a common way of doing things", although it is difficult to >> decide and I would understand the WG position against it, if it was >> the case. Nonetheless I, for one, would be interested in hearing your >> ideas :) >> >> Thanks >> >> Ramon >> > >-- > >Orange > >*Olivier Dugeon* >FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM >Senior research engineer, QoS and network control >Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470 >Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85 >Olivier.Dugeon@orange-ftgroup.com ftgroup.com> > >France Telecom > > >_______________________________________________ >Pce mailing list >Pce@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nu= estra pol=EDtica de env=EDo y recepci=F3n de correo electr=F3nico en el enl= ace situado m=E1s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and re= ceive email on the basis of the terms set out at. http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx From olivier.dugeon@orange.com Mon Sep 26 09:17:01 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE87121F8B00 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:17:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MANGLED_NAIL=2.3, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D+-Z5k+O1o5p for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [217.108.152.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC2421F8AE1 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id C19D87B8001; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:21:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.192.128.46]) by r-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2BF06D8002; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:21:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.192.128.44]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:19:40 +0200 Received: from renot.local ([10.193.116.71]) by ftrdmel10.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:19:41 +0200 Message-ID: <4E80A61D.7030706@orange.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:19:41 +0200 From: Olivier Dugeon Organization: France Telecom R&D User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Oscar_Gonz=E1lez_de_Dios?= References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> <4E7C4971.10002@cttc.es> <4E807A5C.3050402@orange.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Sep 2011 16:19:41.0735 (UTC) FILETIME=[188EB370:01CC7C68] Cc: "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:17:01 -0000 Hello Oscar, all, You are totally right. We must consider all the different levels that=20 PCE could address. But, IMHO, I have more the feeling that there is an agreement to lower=20 the level i.e. go down to take into account the optical, transport ...=20 layers rather than go up to provide an abstract view of AS. I'm afraid=20 that the upper layer stay at the IP/MPLS layer and not go beyond. So, is = why I'm reactivating this discussion. Perhaps, a beginning of the solution could be find in the last chapter=20 17 "The Future of IS-IS" of this book "The complete IS-IS routing=20 protocol (Hannes Gredler=20 and=20 Walter Goralski=20 )".=20 You could google the book if you have not a copy of them. Authors=20 suggest to use the faculty of IS-IS to manage several levels and propose = a first table mapping to manage up to 8 different levels (section 17.3). = This could perfectly feet the needs if operators will be agree to use it = of course ;-) Regards, Olivier Le 26/09/11 16:22, Oscar Gonz=E1lez de Dios a =E9crit : > Hi Ram=F3n, all... > > First of all, I would like to point out that we may differenti= ate several environments with different requirements for the multidomain = problem. The PCE is scoped for any kind of network, from transport networ= ks (OTN/SWON) with a rather limited number of domains, few interconnectio= ns, and few confidentiality issues, transport networks with a large numb= er of domains, MPLS networks with several administrative domains, and big= IP/MPLS networks with a large number of domains with peering agreements.= For each of them, a different solution for the multi-domain path computa= tion may apply. A solution may not be scalable for one, but perfect for a= nother. In this WG, each of us has one particular scenario in mind... so = we need to clearly scope all the contributions/opinions. In my case, I ha= ve in mind more the scenario of a transport network with a reduced number= of domains. > > In each of the above scenarios, different level of information= can be sent to the entity in charge of computing the end to end path. Th= us, I would allow different levels of information exchange, always based = on a standard approach, and let each network operator choose the one that= better fits the needs for the particular case. Thus, there would be a tr= ade-off between scalability and quality of the computed paths. > > Said that, if we feel that using current standards are too com= plex for one scenario, or are not sufficient, then I would support going = for the necessary extensions, maybe not in PCE WG, but more in the routin= g related WGs. If we think that, it is just a matter of specifying how to= use current standards to cover the different scenarios, elaborating an i= nformational RFC would be the best solution. > > Anyway, I would decouple the needs of the PCEP protocol (that = should be focused on providing a standard way to cover the needs of the i= nteractions between PCEs of different domains, or between a H-PCE and PCE= s of different domains, a common way of representing the multidomain path= with different levels of detail) and how to fill the TED (that includes = which information to send, e.g. summarized information, inter-as informat= ion, etc. and the protocol to exchange it). > > So... unless we see that using IGP for feeding the routing inf= ormation to the H-PCE is like to crack a nut with a sledgehammer, I woul= d avoid including in the PCEP protocol the routing information (even thou= gh it is easy to implement), but I agree on specifying how to exchange th= is information (with IGP or any other protocol) for particular scenarios.= So... if we demonstrate that having a full IGP stack only brings interop= erability problems, adds unnecessary complexity, consumes more resources = and does not give additional value, I would support going to the simple a= pproach of clearly specifying the LSAs to embed in PCNtf. > > We need to update soon the draft for the solution of the hiera= rchical PCE, so we must agree on these issues in order to have a common a= pproach. > > Finally, I have another doubt... what about the reachability i= nformation when BGP is not used? Ram=F3n proposed, in the scope of WSON n= etworks, in an OFC research paper, to send the reachability information, = that is the addresses reachable in a given domain, in a PCNtf as, e.g. IP= v4 prefixes (in a BGP style). This information is needed by the PCE to kn= ow which is the domain of a given endpoint. > > Best Regards, > > =D3scar > > >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de >> Olivier Dugeon >> Enviado el: lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2011 15:13 >> Para: Ramon Casellas >> CC: pce@ietf.org >> Asunto: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierar= chy- >> fwk-06 >> >> Hello Ramon, all, >> >> Thanks for your comment. I'm agree with you and I just try to reactiva= te the >> debate too. >> >> IMHO, if we want PCE do a good job, i.e. not only finding the shortest= path, >> but also the one which fit optimally the request we need first to comp= ute the >> AS path to know with which PCE I will collaborate. This AS path is not= >> necessary the shortest one or the one provide by BGP. For such AS path= >> Computation, PCE needs suitable information i.e. at least TE of the pe= ering >> point. >> Exchange such information is more a routing space and a problem of flo= oding. >> >> Now the question is: can we used existing protocol (IGP-TE are good >> candidate) or do we modify PCEP for that purpose ? >> >> Regards, >> >> Olivier >> >> Le 23/09/11 10:55, Ramon Casellas a =E9crit : >>> Dear Olivier, all >>> >>> Please see inline >>> >>> >>> El 22/09/2011 18:22, Olivier Dugeon escribi=F3: >>>> IMHO, I think that it is missing something in the different proposal= >>>> to compute inter-domain tunnel. This is related to the TED. Indeed, >>>> there is no proposal to collect suitable information that could help= >>>> the PCE (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to select (compute) the AS path, and s= o >>>> select the better (regarding the request) peer PCE. Such information= , >>>> like TE of the peering point between two ASs, are mandatory if we >>>> want to select alternate AS path than the one announced by BGP. If >>>> such mandatory information are out of scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid >>>> that, for me, their is no difference between the BRPC and H-PCE, >>>> instead on how PCE are cooperate. The result will be the same in ter= m >>>> of path computation. >>>> >>> As you may know, the issue of TED management and, in particular, TED >>> management in the context of multi-domain path computation is raised >>> regularly (including myself!) and no consensus seems to be reached. >>> >>> To some extent, I understand the (architectural and functional) idea >>> of keeping TED management somehow decoupled from the actual path >>> computation function, as it is done in the context of single domain >>> path computation, where the way the PCE obtains the TED is out of the= >>> scope (and in some sense, orthogonal). >>> >>> However, I believe that in some cases both functions (path computatio= n >>> and TED management) are slightly coupled (border node identification,= >>> endpoint localization and topology aggregation for domain sequence >>> selection, to name a few in which an IGP-based TED may not be >>> sufficient). For what is worth, an approach that we proposed in the >>> past (as well as other implementers) has been to use PCNtf with >>> embedded OSPF-TE LSUs / LSAs (or XML files or any other encoding) TE= D >>> "slices". >>> >>> This approach -- completely non-standard -- can be used for both >>> wrapping and forwarding InterAS links [RFC5392] -- which, I agree wit= h >>> you, seems relevant for a more efficient selection of the AS path and= >>> would seem to address your requirement. This is briefly mentioned in >>> Fatai's and Dan's draft-zhang-pcep-hpce -- the same approach can be >>> used to wrap any other topological information. We did in a research >>> project, including "virtual links or nodes" for topology aggregation >>> (i.e. full-mesh) in H-PCE. In private communications I got the feelin= g >>> that this is somehow "frowned upon" ;) and that AS peering and >>> connectivity is managed at another (i.e. managed) level. >>> >>> >>>> Is this make sense for the PCE WG and if yes, do you think it is >>>> suitable to propose a draft for that purpose (we have some ideas for= >>>> that here) ? >>> I am not against such a proposal, since it is easier and simpler to >>> "stick to a common way of doing things", although it is difficult to >>> decide and I would understand the WG position against it, if it was >>> the case. Nonetheless I, for one, would be interested in hearing your= >>> ideas :) >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Ramon >>> >> -- >> >> Orange >> >> *Olivier Dugeon* >> FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM >> Senior research engineer, QoS and network control >> Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470 >> Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85 >> Olivier.Dugeon@orange-ftgroup.com> ftgroup.com> >> >> France Telecom >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pce mailing list >> Pce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consulta= r nuestra pol=EDtica de env=EDo y recepci=F3n de correo electr=F3nico en = el enlace situado m=E1s abajo. > This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send an= d receive email on the basis of the terms set out at. > http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx > --=20 Orange *Olivier Dugeon* FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM Senior research engineer, QoS and network control Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470 Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85 Olivier.Dugeon@orange-ftgroup.com France Telecom From dhruv.dhody@huawei.com Mon Sep 26 22:25:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C677721F8E4A for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:25:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.198 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ce9nILmVjpv4 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:25:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8BC21F8E49 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:25:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LS600KHH1UIPW@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:27:54 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LS600APO1UD28@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:27:54 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADX56918; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:27:51 +0800 Received: from SZXEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.93) by szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:27:49 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.142]) by szxeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.93]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 13:27:41 +0800 Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 05:27:41 +0000 From: Dhruv Dhody In-reply-to: X-Originating-IP: [10.18.24.164] To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Oscar_Gonz=E1lez_de_Dios?= , Olivier Dugeon , Ramon Casellas Message-id: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B132CC0B1@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_RhxfobBPMpblaX6UNngT0g)" Content-language: en-US Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 Thread-index: AQHMfFgO3mOz7NDX8ECeMx/Y4I79Q5VgoYDA X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected References: <4E78AC63.1020704@orange.com> <4E7B60CB.3010802@orange.com> <4E7C4971.10002@cttc.es> <4E807A5C.3050402@orange.com> Cc: "pce@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-fwk-06 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 05:25:53 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_RhxfobBPMpblaX6UNngT0g) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hi All, Just to continue on this discussion, I wanted to mention that there is anot= her school of thought that has been discussed by few of the authors of HPCE= . The idea is to keep the Parent-PCE's topology graph free of BNs (Boundary= Nodes) and inter-AS TE link; it being composed only of neighbor domain adj= acency. In this case no flooding of BNs and TE-Links via PCNtf or Routing i= s needed. This is esp useful when Parent PCE is used only to get domain-seq= uence and BRPC is applied to get the end-to-end path. IMHO, I agree with Oscar that we should scope all the contributions/opinion= s based on multiple scenarios. There are two approach to find the domain of a given endpoint, as mentioned= Ram=F3n proposal where child PCE send addresses reachable in a its domain = to the Parent PCE via PCNtf. Another method is polling done by Parent PCE, = it can flood the request to all child PCE to find in which domain the endpo= int lies. Regards, Dhruv ***************************************************************************= ************ Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Technologies, Bangalore, India= , Ph. +91-9845062422 This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, w= hich is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed abov= e. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but n= ot limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination)= by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you rece= ive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immedi= ately and delete it! -----Original Message----- From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Oscar= Gonz=E1lez de Dios Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 7:52 PM To: Olivier Dugeon; Ramon Casellas Cc: pce@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-= fwk-06 Hi Ram=F3n, all... First of all, I would like to point out that we may differentiate s= everal environments with different requirements for the multidomain problem= . The PCE is scoped for any kind of network, from transport networks (OTN/S= WON) with a rather limited number of domains, few interconnections, and few= confidentiality issues, transport networks with a large number of domains= , MPLS networks with several administrative domains, and big IP/MPLS networ= ks with a large number of domains with peering agreements. For each of them= , a different solution for the multi-domain path computation may apply. A s= olution may not be scalable for one, but perfect for another. In this WG, e= ach of us has one particular scenario in mind... so we need to clearly scop= e all the contributions/opinions. In my case, I have in mind more the scena= rio of a transport network with a reduced number of domains. In each of the above scenarios, different level of information can = be sent to the entity in charge of computing the end to end path. Thus, I w= ould allow different levels of information exchange, always based on a stan= dard approach, and let each network operator choose the one that better fit= s the needs for the particular case. Thus, there would be a trade-off betwe= en scalability and quality of the computed paths. Said that, if we feel that using current standards are too complex = for one scenario, or are not sufficient, then I would support going for the= necessary extensions, maybe not in PCE WG, but more in the routing related= WGs. If we think that, it is just a matter of specifying how to use curren= t standards to cover the different scenarios, elaborating an informational = RFC would be the best solution. Anyway, I would decouple the needs of the PCEP protocol (that shoul= d be focused on providing a standard way to cover the needs of the interact= ions between PCEs of different domains, or between a H-PCE and PCEs of diff= erent domains, a common way of representing the multidomain path with diffe= rent levels of detail) and how to fill the TED (that includes which informa= tion to send, e.g. summarized information, inter-as information, etc. and t= he protocol to exchange it). So... unless we see that using IGP for feeding the routing informat= ion to the H-PCE is like to crack a nut with a sledgehammer, I would avoid= including in the PCEP protocol the routing information (even though it is = easy to implement), but I agree on specifying how to exchange this informat= ion (with IGP or any other protocol) for particular scenarios. So... if we = demonstrate that having a full IGP stack only brings interoperability probl= ems, adds unnecessary complexity, consumes more resources and does not give= additional value, I would support going to the simple approach of clearly = specifying the LSAs to embed in PCNtf. We need to update soon the draft for the solution of the hierarchic= al PCE, so we must agree on these issues in order to have a common approach= . Finally, I have another doubt... what about the reachability inform= ation when BGP is not used? Ram=F3n proposed, in the scope of WSON networks= , in an OFC research paper, to send the reachability information, that is t= he addresses reachable in a given domain, in a PCNtf as, e.g. IPv4 prefixes= (in a BGP style). This information is needed by the PCE to know which is t= he domain of a given endpoint. Best Regards, =D3scar >-----Mensaje original----- >De: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre de >Olivier Dugeon >Enviado el: lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2011 15:13 >Para: Ramon Casellas >CC: pce@ietf.org >Asunto: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy- >fwk-06 > >Hello Ramon, all, > >Thanks for your comment. I'm agree with you and I just try to reactivate t= he >debate too. > >IMHO, if we want PCE do a good job, i.e. not only finding the shortest pat= h, >but also the one which fit optimally the request we need first to compute = the >AS path to know with which PCE I will collaborate. This AS path is not >necessary the shortest one or the one provide by BGP. For such AS path >Computation, PCE needs suitable information i.e. at least TE of the peerin= g >point. >Exchange such information is more a routing space and a problem of floodin= g. > >Now the question is: can we used existing protocol (IGP-TE are good >candidate) or do we modify PCEP for that purpose ? > >Regards, > >Olivier > >Le 23/09/11 10:55, Ramon Casellas a =E9crit : >> Dear Olivier, all >> >> Please see inline >> >> >> El 22/09/2011 18:22, Olivier Dugeon escribi=F3: >>> >>> IMHO, I think that it is missing something in the different proposal >>> to compute inter-domain tunnel. This is related to the TED. Indeed, >>> there is no proposal to collect suitable information that could help >>> the PCE (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to select (compute) the AS path, and so >>> select the better (regarding the request) peer PCE. Such information, >>> like TE of the peering point between two ASs, are mandatory if we >>> want to select alternate AS path than the one announced by BGP. If >>> such mandatory information are out of scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid >>> that, for me, their is no difference between the BRPC and H-PCE, >>> instead on how PCE are cooperate. The result will be the same in term >>> of path computation. >>> >> >> As you may know, the issue of TED management and, in particular, TED >> management in the context of multi-domain path computation is raised >> regularly (including myself!) and no consensus seems to be reached. >> >> To some extent, I understand the (architectural and functional) idea >> of keeping TED management somehow decoupled from the actual path >> computation function, as it is done in the context of single domain >> path computation, where the way the PCE obtains the TED is out of the >> scope (and in some sense, orthogonal). >> >> However, I believe that in some cases both functions (path computation >> and TED management) are slightly coupled (border node identification, >> endpoint localization and topology aggregation for domain sequence >> selection, to name a few in which an IGP-based TED may not be >> sufficient). For what is worth, an approach that we proposed in the >> past (as well as other implementers) has been to use PCNtf with >> embedded OSPF-TE LSUs / LSAs (or XML files or any other encoding) TED >> "slices". >> >> This approach -- completely non-standard -- can be used for both >> wrapping and forwarding InterAS links [RFC5392] -- which, I agree with >> you, seems relevant for a more efficient selection of the AS path and >> would seem to address your requirement. This is briefly mentioned in >> Fatai's and Dan's draft-zhang-pcep-hpce -- the same approach can be >> used to wrap any other topological information. We did in a research >> project, including "virtual links or nodes" for topology aggregation >> (i.e. full-mesh) in H-PCE. In private communications I got the feeling >> that this is somehow "frowned upon" ;) and that AS peering and >> connectivity is managed at another (i.e. managed) level. >> >> >>> Is this make sense for the PCE WG and if yes, do you think it is >>> suitable to propose a draft for that purpose (we have some ideas for >>> that here) ? >> >> I am not against such a proposal, since it is easier and simpler to >> "stick to a common way of doing things", although it is difficult to >> decide and I would understand the WG position against it, if it was >> the case. Nonetheless I, for one, would be interested in hearing your >> ideas :) >> >> Thanks >> >> Ramon >> > >-- > >Orange > >*Olivier Dugeon* >FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM >Senior research engineer, QoS and network control >Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470 >Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85 >Olivier.Dugeon@orange-ftgroup.com ftgroup.com> > >France Telecom > > >_______________________________________________ >Pce mailing list >Pce@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nu= estra pol=EDtica de env=EDo y recepci=F3n de correo electr=F3nico en el enl= ace situado m=E1s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and re= ceive email on the basis of the terms set out at. http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce --Boundary_(ID_RhxfobBPMpblaX6UNngT0g) Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

Hi All,

 

Just to continue on this discussion, I wanted to ment= ion that there is another school of thought that has been discussed by few = of the authors of HPCE. The idea is to keep the Parent-PCE’s topology graph free of BNs (Boundary Nodes) and inter-AS TE link; it being= composed only of neighbor domain adjacency. In this case no flooding of BN= s and TE-Links via PCNtf or Routing is needed. This is esp useful when Pare= nt PCE is used only to get domain-sequence and BRPC is applied to get the end-to-end path.

 

IMHO, I agree with Oscar that we should scope all the= contributions/opinions based on multiple scenarios.

 

There are two approach to find the domain of a given = endpoint, as mentioned Ram=F3n proposal where child PCE send addresses reac= hable in a its domain to the Parent PCE via PCNtf. Another method is polling done by Parent PCE, it can flood the request to all chil= d PCE to find in which domain the endpoint lies.

 

Regards,

Dhruv

 

*************************************************= **************************************

Dhruv Dhody, Senior Technical Leader, Huawei Tech= nologies, Bangalore, India, Ph. +91-9845062422

 

This e-mail and attachments contain confidential = information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity wh= ose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in= any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by person= s other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e= -mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and = delete it!

 

-----Original Message-----
From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Oscar= Gonz=E1lez de Dios
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 7:52 PM
To: Olivier Dugeon; Ramon Casellas
Cc: pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-= fwk-06

 

Hi Ram=F3n, all...

 

        First = of all, I would like to point out that we may differentiate several environ= ments with different requirements for the multidomain problem. The PCE is s= coped for any kind of network, from transport networks (OTN/SWON) with a rather limited number of domains, few interconnections, and few confiden= tiality issues,  transport networks with a large number of domains, MP= LS networks with several administrative domains, and big IP/MPLS networks w= ith a large number of domains with peering agreements. For each of them, a different solution for the multi-domain pa= th computation may apply. A solution may not be scalable for one, but perfe= ct for another. In this WG, each of us has one particular scenario in mind.= .. so we need to clearly scope all the contributions/opinions. In my case, I have in mind more the scenario o= f a transport network with a reduced number of domains.

 

        In eac= h of the above scenarios, different level of information can be sent to the= entity in charge of computing the end to end path. Thus, I would allow dif= ferent levels of information exchange, always based on a standard approach, and let each network operator choose the one that better fits the needs fo= r the particular case. Thus, there would be a trade-off between scalability= and quality of the computed paths.

 

        Said t= hat, if we feel that using current standards are too complex for one scenar= io, or are not sufficient, then I would support going for the necessary ext= ensions, maybe not in PCE WG, but more in the routing related WGs. If we think that, it is just a matter of specifying how to use current standa= rds to cover the different scenarios, elaborating an informational RFC woul= d be the best solution.

 

        Anyway= , I would decouple the needs of the PCEP protocol (that should be focused o= n providing a standard way to cover the needs of the interactions between P= CEs of different domains, or between a H-PCE and PCEs of different domains, a common way of representing the multidomain path with different levels of= detail) and how to fill the TED (that includes which information to send, = e.g. summarized information, inter-as information, etc. and the protocol to= exchange it).

 

        So... = unless we see that using IGP for feeding the routing information to the H-P= CE is like to crack a nut with a sledgehammer,  I would avoid includin= g in the PCEP protocol the routing information (even though it is easy to implement), but I agree on specifying how to exchange this information (wi= th IGP or any other protocol) for particular scenarios. So... if we demonst= rate that having a full IGP stack only brings interoperability problems, ad= ds unnecessary complexity, consumes more resources and does not give additional value, I would support going t= o the simple approach of clearly specifying the LSAs to embed in PCNtf.

 

        We nee= d to update soon the draft for the solution of the hierarchical PCE, so we = must agree on these issues in order to have a common approach.

 

        Finall= y, I have another doubt... what about the reachability information when BGP= is not used? Ram=F3n proposed, in the scope of WSON networks, in an OFC re= search paper, to send the reachability information, that is the addresses reachable in a given domain, in a PCNtf as, e.g. IPv4 prefixes (in a BGP s= tyle). This information is needed by the PCE to know which is the domain of= a given endpoint.

 

        Best R= egards,

 

        &= nbsp;       =D3scar

 

 

>-----Mensaje original-----

>De: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@= ietf.org] En nombre de

>Olivier Dugeon

>Enviado el: lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2011 1= 5:13

>Para: Ramon Casellas

>CC: pce@ietf.org

>Asunto: Re: [Pce] PCE and TED - was: Adoption= of draft-king-pce-hierarchy-

>fwk-06

> 

>Hello Ramon, all,

> 

>Thanks for your comment. I'm agree with you a= nd I just try to reactivate the

>debate too.

> 

>IMHO, if we want PCE do a good job, i.e. not = only finding the shortest path,

>but also the one which fit optimally the requ= est we need first to compute the

>AS path to know with which PCE I will collabo= rate. This AS path is not

>necessary the shortest one or the one provide= by BGP. For such AS path

>Computation, PCE needs suitable information i= .e. at least TE of the peering

>point.

>Exchange such information is more a routing s= pace and a problem of flooding.

> 

>Now the question is: can we used existing pro= tocol (IGP-TE are good

>candidate) or do we modify PCEP for that purp= ose ?

> 

>Regards,

> 

>Olivier

> 

>Le 23/09/11 10:55, Ramon Casellas a =E9crit :=

>> Dear Olivier, all

>> 

>> Please see inline

>> 

>> 

>> El 22/09/2011 18:22, Olivier Dugeon escr= ibi=F3:

>>> 

>>> IMHO, I think that it is missing som= ething in the different proposal

>>> to compute inter-domain tunnel. This= is related to the TED. Indeed,

>>> there is no proposal to collect suit= able information that could help

>>> the PCE (in BRPC or in H-PCE) to sel= ect (compute) the AS path, and so

>>> select the better (regarding the req= uest) peer PCE. Such information,

>>> like TE of the peering point between= two ASs, are mandatory if we

>>> want to select alternate AS path tha= n the one announced by BGP. If

>>> such mandatory information are out o= f scope of PCE WG, I'm afraid

>>> that, for me, their is no difference= between the BRPC and H-PCE,

>>> instead on how PCE are cooperate. Th= e result will be the same in term

>>> of path computation.

>>> 

>> 

>> As you may know, the issue of TED manage= ment and, in particular, TED

>> management in the context of multi-domai= n path computation is raised

>> regularly (including myself!) and no con= sensus seems to be reached.

>> 

>> To some extent, I understand the (archit= ectural and functional) idea

>> of keeping TED management somehow decoup= led from the actual path

>> computation function, as it is done in t= he context of single domain

>> path computation, where the way the PCE = obtains the TED is out of the

>> scope (and in some sense, orthogonal).

>> 

>> However, I believe that in some cases bo= th functions (path computation

>> and TED management) are slightly coupled= (border node identification,

>> endpoint localization and topology aggre= gation for domain sequence

>> selection, to name a few in which an IGP= -based TED may not be

>> sufficient). For what is worth, an appro= ach that we proposed in the

>> past (as well as other implementers) has= been to use PCNtf with

>> embedded OSPF-TE LSUs / LSAs (or XML fil= es or any other encoding)  TED

>> "slices".

>> 

>> This approach -- completely non-standard= -- can be used for both

>> wrapping and forwarding InterAS links [R= FC5392] -- which, I agree with

>> you, seems relevant for a more efficient= selection of the AS path and

>> would seem to address your requirement. = This is briefly mentioned in

>> Fatai's and Dan's draft-zhang-pcep-hpce = --  the same approach can be

>> used to wrap any other topological infor= mation. We did in a research

>> project, including "virtual links o= r nodes" for topology aggregation

>> (i.e. full-mesh) in H-PCE. In private co= mmunications I got the feeling

>> that this is somehow "frowned upon&= quot; ;) and that AS peering and

>> connectivity is managed at another (i.e.= managed) level.

>> 

>> 

>>> Is this make sense for the PCE WG an= d if yes, do you think it is

>>> suitable to propose a draft for that= purpose (we have some ideas for

>>> that here) ?

>> 

>> I am not against such a proposal, since = it is easier and simpler to

>> "stick to a common way of doing thi= ngs", although it is difficult to

>> decide and I would understand the WG pos= ition against it, if it was

>> the case. Nonetheless I, for one, would = be interested in hearing your

>> ideas :)

>> 

>> Thanks

>> 

>> Ramon

>> 

> 

>--

> 

>Orange

> 

>*Olivier Dugeon*

>FT/NSM/RD/CORE/M2I/CRM

>Senior research engineer, QoS and network con= trol

>Phone/Fax: +33 296 05 2880/1470

>Mobile: +33 6 82 90 37 85

>Olivier.Dugeon@orange-ftgroup.com <mailto:= olivier.dugeon@orange-

>ftgroup.com>

> 

>France Telecom

> 

> 

>_____________________________________________= __

>Pce mailing list

>Pce@ietf.org

>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

 

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destin= atario. Puede consultar nuestra pol=EDtica de env=EDo y recepci=F3n de corr= eo electr=F3nico en el enlace situado m=E1s abajo.

This message is intended exclusively for its addr= essee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at.=

http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx=

_______________________________________________

Pce mailing list

Pce@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

--Boundary_(ID_RhxfobBPMpblaX6UNngT0g)-- From ramon.casellas@cttc.es Tue Sep 27 00:18:17 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03CEE21F8E28 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:18:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IUVuLa0gbCLv for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Scorpius.cttc.es (scorpius.cttc.es [84.88.62.197]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFF621F8E1A for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:18:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castor (postfix@castor.cttc.es [84.88.62.196]) by Scorpius.cttc.es (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8R7KbGB014936 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:20:47 +0200 Received: from [84.88.61.50] (pcrcasellas.cttc.es [84.88.61.50]) by castor (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E772FC26A for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:20:37 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E817982.5020101@cttc.es> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:21:38 +0200 From: Ramon Casellas Organization: CTTC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "pce@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (castor); Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:20:37 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 84.88.62.197 Subject: [Pce] PCE and (multi-domain) TED X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 07:18:17 -0000 (moving to a new thread) El 26/09/2011 16:22, Oscar González de Dios escribió: > We need to update soon the draft for the solution of the hierarchical PCE, so we must agree on these issues in order to have a common approach. > > Finally, I have another doubt... what about the reachability information when BGP is not used? Ramón proposed, in the scope of WSON networks, in an OFC research paper, to send the reachability information, that is the addresses reachable in a given domain, in a PCNtf as, e.g. IPv4 prefixes (in a BGP style). This information is needed by the PCE to know which is the domain of a given endpoint. > PCErs, all, The current H-PCE draft on PCEP protocol extensions uses a form of polling to locate an endpoint amongst the child PCE. As Oscar mentions, I believe this is not / should not be the only option. We discussed about this with Dhruv in Prague, IIRC. In summary, regarding reachability we are again at the edge of "path computation"/"TED management" and what is considered to be in scope of the functions of a PCE. So the different options are: i) Since both are different functions, maintain their strict separation. A Parent PCE is able to map an endpoint to a given (child) domain. The way it does this is out of the scope of the work in H-PCE. I would agree that this seems to fit with the "philosophy" of PCE at least in the way TED is managed. However, saying it is not in scope does not really solve the problem ;) it simply moves it to another place.... ii) Allow, in the scope of H-PCE, to have the parent PCE "poll" children to locate an endpoint. Personally I am unsure of the approach, specially using a Path Computation Request / Response with some bit set which magically means "I don't want to compute, just to find a node. The path / nopath and other attributes are meaningless". Without precluding that the parent PCE may use some form of caching of endpoints and their domain, it is not only the fact that relies on polling, but the fact that uses a requests/response message exchange what somehow confuses me. iii) Our proposal, since it was already proposed that the child PCE could disseminate OSPF-TE encoded TE links wrapped in notifications, reachability could also be managed this way. This is why in our tests we simple add "ERO-like" TLVs that announce reachability using CIDR prefixes within notifications. Maybe both ii) and iii) could be used Finally, iv) Start work regarding a unified way TED (specially TED in multi-domain) is managed. This is the main / major issue that most of the mails have been referring to lately, ranging from extending OSPF-TE to disseminate Area IDs (draft-lu-ospf-area-tlv-01.txt) , extensions to BRPC to have bidirectional TE information (draft-wang-pce-inter-as-extentions-01), H-PCE InterAS, AS connectivity, Border nodes identification, endpoint localization.... All this concepts have in common the limitations of current visibility outside a given TE domain. I guess a potential solution to this is what Olivier refers to as "hierarchical TED" (?) My personal preference, if we do not address iv) which is in itself quite a significant work, would be iii) ii) and i) -- although I would prefer other messages to be used in ii) I am aware Dhruv et al. may prefer polling. Thanks for reading Ramon -- Ramon Casellas, Ph.D. Research Associate - Optical Networking Area -- http://wikiona.cttc.es CTTC - Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya, PMT Ed B4 Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss, 7 - 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona) - Spain Tel.: +34 93 645 29 00 -- Fax. +34 93 645 29 01 From cyril.margaria@nsn.com Thu Sep 29 05:05:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D38E321F8C69 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 05:05:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.064 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.535, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zNX9B8qmQzBh for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 05:05:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0023121F8C59 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 05:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8TC8FuD026157 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:08:15 +0200 Received: from demuexc023.nsn-intra.net (demuexc023.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.36]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p8TC87YD000918; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:08:12 +0200 Received: from DEMUEXC012.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.23]) by demuexc023.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:07:36 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CC7EA0.606F70FB" Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:07:34 +0200 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext] Comments and proposal on draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-05 Thread-Index: Acx+oF9tjMm9XxA/RsyX1eNngsaJ9A== From: "Margaria, Cyril (NSN - DE/Munich)" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2011 12:07:36.0572 (UTC) FILETIME=[607F3BC0:01CC7EA0] Subject: [Pce] [draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext] Comments and proposal on draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-05 X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:05:29 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CC7EA0.606F70FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Editors, authors.=20 During discussion on draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions and other = discussion one point that was raised is the fact that the SWITCH-LAYER = does require the presence of the INTER-LAYER, but not the REQ-ADAPT. >From an implementer point of view it would be interesting to specify = which layer to use but not have to support the full semantic of the = INTER-LAYER object.=20 I do think its possible to have the INTER-LAYER always optional. When = its not present its considered as a mono-layer request (also for the = SWITCH-LAYER). Do you see any problem with this approach, if no do you think this can = be included in the document? Please find a proposal in the attached document, modified lines start = with a '*',=20 I also did put some other comments, especially regarding the ERO object. <>=20 Mit freundlichen Gr=FC=DFen / Best Regards Cyril Margaria Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH & Co. KG NWS DWDM RD St.Martin-Str. 76 D-81541 M=FCnchen Germany mailto:cyril.margaria@nsn.com Phone: +49-89-5159-16934 Fax: +49-89-5159-44-16934 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH & Co. KG=20 Sitz der Gesellschaft: M=FCnchen / Registered office: Munich=20 Registergericht: M=FCnchen / Commercial registry: Munich, HRA 88537=20 WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE 52984304=20 Pers=F6nlich haftende Gesellschafterin / General Partner: Nokia Siemens = Networks Management GmbH=20 Gesch=E4ftsleitung / Board of Directors: Dr. Hermann Rodler, Lydia = Sommer, Olaf Horsthemke=20 Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats / Chairman of supervisory board: Herbert = Merz=20 Sitz der Gesellschaft: M=FCnchen / Registered office: Munich=20 Registergericht: M=FCnchen / Commercial registry: Munich, HRB 163416=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CC7EA0.606F70FB Content-Type: text/plain; name="draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-05-comment.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-05-comment.txt Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-05-comment.txt" TmV0d29yayBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgRS4gT2tpIApJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBVRUMgVG9reW8gCkludGVuZGVkIHN0YXR1czogU3RhbmRh cmRzIFRyYWNrICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFRvbW9ub3JpIFRha2VkYSAKICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgTlRUIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSi1MIExlIFJvdXggCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBGcmFuY2UgVGVsZWNvbSAKICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgQS4gRmFy cmVsIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICBPbGQgRG9nIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBGYXRhaSBaaGFuZyAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSHVhd2VpIApF eHBpcmVzOiBEZWNlbWJlciAxNywgMjAxMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IEp1bmUgMTcsIDIwMTEgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCgoK ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICBFeHRlbnNpb25zIHRv IHRoZSBQYXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uIEVsZW1lbnQgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBQcm90b2NvbCAgCiAg ICAgICAgIChQQ0VQKSBmb3IgSW50ZXItTGF5ZXIgTVBMUyBhbmQgR01QTFMgVHJhZmZpYyBFbmdp bmVlcmluZyAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcGNlLWludGVyLWxheWVyLWV4dC0wNS50eHQgCgoKU3RhdHVz IG9mIHRoaXMgTWVtbyAKCiAgIFRoaXMgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgaXMgc3VibWl0dGVkIHRvIElF VEYgaW4gZnVsbCBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoICAgCiAgIHRoZSBwcm92aXNpb25zIG9mIEJDUCA3 OCBhbmQgQkNQIDc5LiAKCiAgIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhcmUgd29ya2luZyBkb2N1bWVudHMg b2YgdGhlIEludGVybmV0IEVuZ2luZWVyaW5nICAgCiAgIFRhc2sgRm9yY2UgKElFVEYpLCBpdHMg YXJlYXMsIGFuZCBpdHMgd29ya2luZyBncm91cHMuICBOb3RlIHRoYXQgICAKICAgb3RoZXIgZ3Jv dXBzIG1heSBhbHNvIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGUgd29ya2luZyBkb2N1bWVudHMgYXMgSW50ZXJuZXQtICAg CiAgIERyYWZ0cy4gCgogICBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMgYXJlIGRyYWZ0IGRvY3VtZW50cyB2YWxp ZCBmb3IgYSBtYXhpbXVtIG9mIHNpeCBtb250aHMgICAKICAgYW5kIG1heSBiZSB1cGRhdGVkLCBy ZXBsYWNlZCwgb3Igb2Jzb2xldGVkIGJ5IG90aGVyIGRvY3VtZW50cyBhdCBhbnkgICAKICAgdGlt ZS4gIEl0IGlzIGluYXBwcm9wcmlhdGUgdG8gdXNlIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhcyByZWZlcmVu Y2UgICAKICAgbWF0ZXJpYWwgb3IgdG8gY2l0ZSB0aGVtIG90aGVyIHRoYW4gYXMgIndvcmsgaW4g cHJvZ3Jlc3MuIiAKCiAgIFRoZSBsaXN0IG9mIGN1cnJlbnQgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGNhbiBi ZSBhY2Nlc3NlZCBhdCAgIAogICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2lldGYvMWlkLWFic3RyYWN0 cy50eHQuIAoKICAgVGhlIGxpc3Qgb2YgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgU2hhZG93IERpcmVjdG9yaWVz IGNhbiBiZSBhY2Nlc3NlZCBhdCAgIAogICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3NoYWRvdy5odG1s LiAKCiAgIFRoaXMgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgd2lsbCBleHBpcmUgb24gRGVjZW1iZXIgMTcsIDIw MTEuIAoKICAgIAoKQWJzdHJhY3QgCgogCiAKIAo8RS4gT2tpPiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBp cmVzIERlY2VtYmVyIDIwMTEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDFdIAoMCmRyYWZ0LWlldGYt cGNlLWludGVyLWxheWVyLWV4dC0wNS50eHQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBKdW5lIDIw MTEgCiAgICAKCiAgIFRoZSBQYXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uIEVsZW1lbnQgKFBDRSkgcHJvdmlkZXMg cGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiAKICAgZnVuY3Rpb25zIGluIHN1cHBvcnQgb2YgdHJhZmZpYyBlbmdp bmVlcmluZyBpbiBNdWx0aXByb3RvY29sIExhYmVsIAogICBTd2l0Y2hpbmcgKE1QTFMpIGFuZCBH ZW5lcmFsaXplZCBNUExTIChHTVBMUykgbmV0d29ya3MuIAoKICAgTVBMUyBhbmQgR01QTFMgbmV0 d29ya3MgbWF5IGJlIGNvbnN0cnVjdGVkIGZyb20gbGF5ZXJlZCBzZXJ2aWNlIAogICBuZXR3b3Jr cy4gSXQgaXMgYWR2YW50YWdlb3VzIGZvciBvdmVyYWxsIG5ldHdvcmsgZWZmaWNpZW5jeSB0byAK ICAgcHJvdmlkZSBlbmQtdG8tZW5kIHRyYWZmaWMgZW5naW5lZXJpbmcgYWNyb3NzIG11bHRpcGxl IG5ldHdvcmsgbGF5ZXJzIAogICB0aHJvdWdoIGEgcHJvY2VzcyBjYWxsZWQgaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIg dHJhZmZpYyBlbmdpbmVlcmluZy4gUENFIGlzIGEgCiAgIGNhbmRpZGF0ZSBzb2x1dGlvbiBmb3Ig c3VjaCByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMuIAoKICAgVGhlIFBDRSBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIFByb3RvY29sIChQ Q0VQKSBpcyBkZXNpZ25lZCBhcyBhIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gCiAgIHByb3RvY29sIGJldHdlZW4g UGF0aCBDb21wdXRhdGlvbiBDbGllbnRzIChQQ0NzKSBhbmQgUENFcy4gVGhpcyAKICAgZG9jdW1l bnQgcHJlc2VudHMgUENFUCBleHRlbnNpb25zIGZvciBpbnRlci1sYXllciB0cmFmZmljIGVuZ2lu ZWVyaW5nLiAKCkNvbnZlbnRpb25zIHVzZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCAKCiAgIFRoZSBrZXkg d29yZHMgIk1VU1QiLCAiTVVTVCBOT1QiLCAiUkVRVUlSRUQiLCAiU0hBTEwiLCAiU0hBTEwgTk9U IiwgCiAgICJTSE9VTEQiLCAiU0hPVUxEIE5PVCIsICJSRUNPTU1FTkRFRCIsICJNQVkiLCBhbmQg Ik9QVElPTkFMIiBpbiB0aGlzIAogICBkb2N1bWVudCBhcmUgdG8gYmUgaW50ZXJwcmV0ZWQgYXMg ZGVzY3JpYmVkIGluIFJGQy0yMTE5IFtSRkMyMTE5XS4gCgpUYWJsZSBvZiBDb250ZW50cyAKCiAg ICAKICAgMS4gSW50cm9kdWN0aW9uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjMgCiAgIDIuIE92ZXJ2aWV3IG9mIFBDRS1CYXNlZCBJbnRlci1MYXllciBQ YXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi40IAogICAzLiBQcm90b2NvbCBFeHRlbnNpb25zLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uNCAKICAgICAgMy4xLiBJTlRF Ui1MQVlFUiBPYmplY3QuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjQgCiAg ICAgIDMuMi4gU1dJVENILUxBWUVSIE9iamVjdC4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi43IAogICAgICAzLjMuIFJFUS1BREFQLUNBUCBPYmplY3QuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uOCAKICAgICAgMy40LiBOZXcgTWV0cmljIFR5cGVzLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjkgCiAgICAgIDMuNS4gRVJPIHN1Yi1v YmplY3QuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjEwIAogICA0LiBQ cm9jZWR1cmVzLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4xMCAKICAgICAgNC4xLiBQYXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uIFJlcXVlc3QuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uMTAgCiAgICAgIDQuMi4gUGF0aCBDb21wdXRhdGlvbiBSZXBseS4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjExIAogICA1LiBVcGRhdGVkIEZvcm1hdCBvZiBQ Q0VQIE1lc3NhZ2VzLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4xMiAKICAgNi4gTWFuYWdl YWJpbGl0eSBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucy4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uMTMg CiAgIDcuIElBTkEgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLjEzIAogICAgICA3LjEuIE5ldyBQQ0VQIE9iamVjdHMuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4xMyAKICAgICAgNy4yLiBOZXcgUmVnaXN0cnkgZm9yIElO VEVSLUxBWUVSIE9iamVjdCBGbGFncy4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uMTQgCiAgICAgIDcuMy4gTUVUUklD IFR5cGUuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjE0IAogICA4 LiBTZWN1cml0eSBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucy4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4xNSAKICAgOS4gQWNrbm93bGVkZ21lbnRzLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uMTUgCiAgIDEwLiBSZWZlcmVuY2VzLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjE1IAogICAgICAxMC4xLiBOb3JtYXRpdmUg UmVmZXJlbmNlcy4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4xNSAKICAgICAgMTAu Mi4gSW5mb3JtYXRpdmUgUmVmZXJlbmNlcy4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u MTYgCiAgIDExLiBBdXRob3JzJyBBZGRyZXNzZXMuLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLi4u Li4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLjE2IAogICAgCiAKIApFLiBPa2kgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVz IERlY2VtYmVyIDIwMTEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDJdIAoMCmRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcGNl LWludGVyLWxheWVyLWV4dC0wNS50eHQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBKdW5lIDIwMTEg CiAgICAKCiAgICAKCjEuIEludHJvZHVjdGlvbiAKCiAgIFRoZSBQYXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uIEVs ZW1lbnQgKFBDRSkgZGVmaW5lZCBpbiBbUkZDNDY1NV0gaXMgYW4gZW50aXR5IAogICB0aGF0IGlz IGNhcGFibGUgb2YgY29tcHV0aW5nIGEgbmV0d29yayBwYXRoIG9yIHJvdXRlIGJhc2VkIG9uIGEg CiAgIG5ldHdvcmsgZ3JhcGgsIGFuZCBhcHBseWluZyBjb21wdXRhdGlvbmFsIGNvbnN0cmFpbnRz LiBBIFBhdGggCiAgIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uIENsaWVudCAoUENDKSBtYXkgbWFrZSByZXF1ZXN0cyB0 byBhIFBDRSBmb3IgcGF0aHMgdG8gYmUgCiAgIGNvbXB1dGVkLiAKCiAgIEEgbmV0d29yayBtYXkg Y29tcHJpc2UgbXVsdGlwbGUgbGF5ZXJzLiBUaGVzZSBsYXllcnMgbWF5IHJlcHJlc2VudCAKICAg c2VwYXJhdGlvbnMgb2YgdGVjaG5vbG9naWVzIChlLmcuLCBwYWNrZXQgc3dpdGNoIGNhcGFibGUg KFBTQyksIHRpbWUgCiAgIGRpdmlzaW9uIG11bHRpcGxleCAoVERNKSwgbGFtYmRhIHN3aXRjaCBj YXBhYmxlIChMU0MpKSBbUkZDMzk0NV0sIAogICBzZXBhcmF0aW9uIG9mIGRhdGEgcGxhbmUgc3dp dGNoaW5nIGdyYW51bGFyaXR5IGxldmVscyAoZS5nLiwgUFNDLTEgCiAgIGFuZCAgUFNDLTIsIG9y IFZDNCBhbmQgVkMxMikgW1JGQzUyMTJdLCBvciBhIGRpc3RpbmN0aW9uIGJldHdlZW4gCiAgIGNs aWVudCBhbmQgc2VydmVyIG5ldHdvcmtpbmcgcm9sZXMgKGUuZy4sIGNvbW1lcmNpYWwgb3IgCiAg IGFkbWluaXN0cmF0aXZlIHNlcGFyYXRpb24gb2YgY2xpZW50IGFuZCBzZXJ2ZXIgbmV0d29ya3Mp LiBJbiB0aGlzIAogICBtdWx0aS1sYXllciBuZXR3b3JrLCBMYWJlbCBTd2l0Y2hlZCBQYXRocyAo TFNQcykgaW4gbG93ZXIgbGF5ZXJzIGFyZSAKICAgdXNlZCB0byBjYXJyeSBoaWdoZXItbGF5ZXIg TFNQcy4gVGhlIG5ldHdvcmsgdG9wb2xvZ3kgZm9ybWVkIGJ5IAogICBsb3dlci1sYXllciBMU1Bz IGFuZCBhZHZlcnRpc2VkIGFzIHRyYWZmaWMgZW5naW5lZXJpbmcgbGlua3MgKFRFIAogICBsaW5r cykgaW4gdGhlIGhpZ2hlciBsYXllciBpcyBjYWxsZWQgYSBWaXJ0dWFsIE5ldHdvcmsgVG9wb2xv Z3kgKFZOVCkgCiAgIFtSRkM1MjEyXS4gCgogICBJdCBpcyBpbXBvcnRhbnQgdG8gb3B0aW1pemUg bmV0d29yayByZXNvdXJjZSB1dGlsaXphdGlvbiBnbG9iYWxseSwgCiAgIGkuZS4sIHRha2luZyBp bnRvIGFjY291bnQgYWxsIGxheWVycywgcmF0aGVyIHRoYW4gb3B0aW1pemluZyByZXNvdXJjZSAK ICAgdXRpbGl6YXRpb24gYXQgZWFjaCBsYXllciBpbmRlcGVuZGVudGx5LiBUaGlzIGFsbG93cyBi ZXR0ZXIgbmV0d29yayAKICAgZWZmaWNpZW5jeSB0byBiZSBhY2hpZXZlZC4gVGhpcyBpcyB3aGF0 IHdlIGNhbGwgaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIgdHJhZmZpYyAKICAgZW5naW5lZXJpbmcuIFRoaXMgaW5jbHVk ZXMgbWVjaGFuaXNtcyBhbGxvd2luZyB0aGUgY29tcHV0YXRpb24gb2YgCiAgIGVuZC10by1lbmQg cGF0aHMgYWNyb3NzIGxheWVycyAoa25vd24gYXMgaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCAKICAgY29tcHV0 YXRpb24pLCBhbmQgbWVjaGFuaXNtcyBmb3IgY29udHJvbCBhbmQgbWFuYWdlbWVudCBvZiB0aGUg Vk5UIGJ5IAogICBzZXR0aW5nIHVwIGFuZCByZWxlYXNpbmcgTFNQcyBpbiB0aGUgbG93ZXIgbGF5 ZXJzIFtSRkM1MjEyXS4gCgogICBQQ0UgY2FuIHByb3ZpZGUgYSBzdWl0YWJsZSBtZWNoYW5pc20g Zm9yIHJlc29sdmluZyBpbnRlci1sYXllciBwYXRoIAogICBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiBpc3N1ZXMuIFRo ZSBmcmFtZXdvcmsgZm9yIGFwcGx5aW5nIHRoZSBQQ0UtYmFzZWQgcGF0aCAKICAgY29tcHV0YXRp b24gYXJjaGl0ZWN0dXJlIHRvIGludGVyLWxheWVyIHRyYWZmaWMgZW5naW5lZXJpbmcgaXMgCiAg IGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbiBbUkZDNTYyM10uIAoKICAgVGhlIFBDRSBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIHByb3Rv Y29sIChQQ0VQKSBpcyBkZXNpZ25lZCBhcyBhIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gCiAgIHByb3RvY29sIGJl dHdlZW4gUENDcyBhbmQgUENFcyBhbmQgaXMgZGVmaW5lZCBpbiBbUkZDNTQ0MF0uIEEgc2V0IG9m IAogICByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgZm9yIFBDRVAgZXh0ZW5zaW9ucyB0byBzdXBwb3J0IGludGVyLWxh eWVyIHRyYWZmaWMgCiAgIGVuZ2luZWVyaW5nIGlzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbiBbUENFLUlOVEVSLUxB WUVSLVJFUV0uIAoKICAgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBwcmVzZW50cyBQQ0VQIGV4dGVuc2lvbnMgZm9y IGludGVyLWxheWVyIHRyYWZmaWMgCiAgIGVuZ2luZWVyaW5nIHRoYXQgc2F0aXNmeSB0aGUgcmVx dWlyZW1lbnRzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbiBbUENFLUlOVEVSLQogICBMQVlFUi1SRVFdLiAKCgogCiAK RS4gT2tpICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAyMDExICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICBbUGFnZSAzXSAKDApkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXllci1leHQtMDUudHh0ICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSnVuZSAyMDExIAogICAgCgoyLiBPdmVydmlldyBvZiBQQ0Ut QmFzZWQgSW50ZXItTGF5ZXIgUGF0aCBDb21wdXRhdGlvbiAgCgogICBbUkZDNDIwNl0gZGVmaW5l cyBhIHdheSB0byBzaWduYWwgYSBoaWdoZXItbGF5ZXIgTFNQIHdoaWNoIGhhcyBhbiAKICAgZXhw bGljaXQgcm91dGUgdGhhdCBpbmNsdWRlcyBob3BzIHRyYXZlcnNlZCBieSBMU1BzIGluIGxvd2Vy IGxheWVycy4gCiAgIFRoZSBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiBvZiBlbmQtdG8tZW5kIHBhdGhzIGFjcm9zcyBs YXllcnMgaXMgY2FsbGVkIEludGVyLQogICBMYXllciBQYXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uLiAKCiAgIEEg TGFiZWwgU3dpdGNoaW5nIFJvdXRlciAoTFNSKSBpbiB0aGUgaGlnaGVyLWxheWVyIG1pZ2h0IG5v dCBoYXZlIAogICBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBvbiB0aGUgbG93ZXItbGF5ZXIgdG9wb2xvZ3ksIHBhcnRp Y3VsYXJseSBpbiBhbiBvdmVybGF5IAogICBvciBhdWdtZW50ZWQgbW9kZWwgW1JGQzM5NDVdLCBh bmQgaGVuY2UgbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBhYmxlIHRvIGNvbXB1dGUgYW4gCiAgIGVuZC10by1lbmQgcGF0 aCBhY3Jvc3MgbGF5ZXJzLiAKCiAgIFBDRS1iYXNlZCBpbnRlci1sYXllciBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0 aW9uIGNvbnNpc3RzIG9mIHVzaW5nIG9uZSBvciBtb3JlIAogICBQQ0VzIHRvIGNvbXB1dGUgYW4g ZW5kLXRvLWVuZCBwYXRoIGFjcm9zcyBsYXllcnMuIFRoaXMgY291bGQgYmUgCiAgIGFjaGlldmVk IGJ5IHJlbHlpbmcgb24gYSBzaW5nbGUgUENFIHRoYXQgaGFzIHRvcG9sb2d5IGluZm9ybWF0aW9u IAogICBhYm91dCBtdWx0aXBsZSBsYXllcnMgYW5kIGNhbiBkaXJlY3RseSBjb21wdXRlIGFuIGVu ZC10by1lbmQgcGF0aCAKICAgYWNyb3NzIGxheWVycyBjb25zaWRlcmluZyB0aGUgdG9wb2xvZ3kg b2YgYWxsIG9mIHRoZSBsYXllcnMuIAogICBBbHRlcm5hdGl2ZWx5LCB0aGUgaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIg cGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiBjb3VsZCBiZSBwZXJmb3JtZWQgCiAgIHVzaW5nIG11bHRpcGxlIGNv b3BlcmF0aW5nIFBDRXMgd2hlcmUgZWFjaCBQQ0UgaGFzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IAogICB0 aGUgdG9wb2xvZ3kgb2Ygb25lIG9yIG1vcmUgbGF5ZXJzIChidXQgbm90IGFsbCBsYXllcnMpIGFu ZCB3aGVyZSB0aGUgCiAgIFBDRXMgY29sbGFib3JhdGUgdG8gY29tcHV0ZSBhbiBlbmQtdG8tZW5k IHBhdGguIAoKICAgQXMgZGVzY3JpYmVkIGluIFtSRkMgNTMzOV0sIGEgaHlicmlkIG5vZGVzIG1h eSBhZHZlcnRpc2UgYSBzaW5nbGUgVEUgCiAgIGxpbmsgd2l0aCBtdWx0aXBsZSBzd2l0Y2hpbmcg Y2FwYWJpbGl0aWVzLiBUaG9zZSBURSBsaW5rcyBleGlzdCBhdCAKICAgdGhlIGxheWVyL3JlZ2lv biBib2FyZGVyIG5vcm1hbGx5LiBJbiB0aGlzIGNhc2UsIFBDRSBuZWVkcyB0byBiZSAKICAgY2Fw YWJsZSBvZiBzcGVjaWZ5aW5nIHRoZSBzZXJ2ZXIgbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiB3aGVu IHRoZSAKICAgc2VydmVyIGxheWVyIHBhdGggaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gaXMgcmVxdWlyZWQgdG8gYmUg cmV0dXJuZWQgdG8gdGhlIFBDQy4gIAoKICAgW1JGQzU2MjNdIGRlc2NyaWJlcyBtb2RlbHMgZm9y IGludGVyLWxheWVyIHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRpb24gaW4gbW9yZSAKICAgZGV0YWlsLiAKCjMuIFBy b3RvY29sIEV4dGVuc2lvbnMgIAoKICAgVGhpcyBzZWN0aW9uIGRlc2NyaWJlcyBQQ0VQIGV4dGVu c2lvbnMgZm9yIGludGVyLWxheWVyIHBhdGggCiAgIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uLiBUaHJlZSBuZXcgb2Jq ZWN0cyBhcmUgZGVmaW5lZDogdGhlIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCwgCiAgIHRoZSBTV0lUQ0gt TEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0LCBhbmQgdGhlIFJFUS1BREFQLUNBUCBvYmplY3QuIEFsc28sIHR3byBuZXcg CiAgIG1ldHJpYyB0eXBlcyBhcmUgZGVmaW5lZC4gCgozLjEuIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIE9iamVjdCAg CgogICBUaGUgSU5URVItTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0IGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsIGFuZCBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZCBp biBQQ1JlcSBhbmQgUENSZXAgCiAgIG1lc3NhZ2VzLiAKCiAgIEluIGEgUENSZXEgbWVzc2FnZSwg dGhlIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCBpbmRpY2F0ZXMgd2hldGhlciBpbnRlci0KICAgbGF5ZXIg cGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiBpcyBhbGxvd2VkLCB0aGUgdHlwZSBvZiBwYXRoIHRvIGJlIGNvbXB1 dGVkLCAKICAgYW5kIHdoZXRoZXIgdHJpZ2dlcmVkIHNpZ25hbGluZyAoaGllcmFyY2hpY2FsIExT UHMgcGVyIFtSRkM0MjA2XSBvciAKICAgc3RpdGNoZWQgTFNQcyBwZXIgW1JGQzUxNTBdIGRlcGVu ZGluZyBvbiBwaHlzaWNhbCBuZXR3b3JrIAogCiAKRS4gT2tpICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhw aXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAyMDExICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSA0XSAKDApkcmFmdC1pZXRm LXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXllci1leHQtMDUudHh0ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSnVuZSAy MDExIAogICAgCgogICB0ZWNobm9sb2dpZXMpIGlzIGFsbG93ZWQuIFdoZW4gdGhlIElOVEVSLUxB WUVSIG9iamVjdCBpcyBhYnNlbnQgZnJvbSAKICAgYSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNzYWdlLCB0aGUgcmVjZWl2 aW5nIFBDRSBNVVNUIHByb2Nlc3MgYXMgdGhvdWdoIGludGVyLWxheWVyIAogICBwYXRoIGNvbXB1 dGF0aW9uIGhhZCBiZWVuIGV4cGxpY2l0bHkgZGlzYWxsb3dlZCAoSS1iaXQgc2V0IHRvIHplcm8g LSAKICAgc2VlIGJlbG93KS4gCgogICBJbiBhIFBDUmVwIG1lc3NhZ2UsIHRoZSBJTlRFUi1MQVlF UiBvYmplY3QgaW5kaWNhdGVzIHdoZXRoZXIgaW50ZXItCiAgIGxheWVyIHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRp b24gaGFzIGJlZW4gcGVyZm9ybWVkLCB0aGUgdHlwZSBvZiBwYXRoIHRoYXQgaGFzIAogICBiZWVu IGNvbXB1dGVkLCBhbmQgd2hldGhlciB0cmlnZ2VyZWQgc2lnbmFsaW5nIGlzIHVzZWQuIAoKICAg V2hlbiBhIFBDUmVxIG1lc3NhZ2UgaW5jbHVkZXMgbW9yZSB0aGFuIG9uZSByZXF1ZXN0LCBhbiBJ TlRFUi1MQVlFUiAKICAgb2JqZWN0IGlzIHVzZWQgcGVyIHJlcXVlc3QuIFdoZW4gYSBQQ1JlcCBt ZXNzYWdlIGluY2x1ZGVzIG1vcmUgdGhhbiAKICAgb25lIHBhdGggcGVyIHJlcXVlc3QgdGhhdCBp cyByZXNwb25kZWQgdG8sIGFuIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCBpcyAKICAgdXNlZCBwZXIgcGF0 aC4gCgogICBJTlRFUi1MQVlFUiBPYmplY3QtQ2xhc3MgaXMgdG8gYmUgYXNzaWduZWQgYnkgSUFO QSAocmVjb21tZW5kZWQgCiAgIHZhbHVlPTE4KSAKCiAgIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIE9iamVjdC1UeXBl IGlzIHRvIGJlIGFzc2lnbmVkIGJ5IElBTkEgKHJlY29tbWVuZGVkIAogICB2YWx1ZT0xKSAKCiAg IFRoZSBmb3JtYXQgb2YgdGhlIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCBib2R5IGlzIGFzIGZvbGxvd3M6 IAoKICAgIDAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAyICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIDMgCiAgICAwIDEgMiAzIDQgNSA2IDcgOCA5IDAgMSAyIDMgNCA1IDYgNyA4IDkg MCAxIDIgMyA0IDUgNiA3IDggOSAwIDEgCiAgICstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rIAogICB8ICAgIFJlc2VydmVkICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfFR8TXxJfCAKICAgKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSsgCiAgICAKCiAgIEkgZmxhZyAoMSBiaXQpOiBUaGUgSSBmbGFnIGlzIHVzZWQgYnkgYSBQ Q0MgaW4gYSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNzYWdlIHRvIAogICBpbmRpY2F0ZSB0byBhIFBDRSB3aGV0aGVyIGFu IGludGVyLWxheWVyIHBhdGggaXMgYWxsb3dlZC4gV2hlbiB0aGUgSSAKICAgZmxhZyBpcyBzZXQg KG9uZSksIHRoZSBQQ0UgTUFZIHBlcmZvcm0gaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiAK ICAgYW5kIHJldHVybiBhbiBpbnRlci1sYXllciBwYXRoLiBXaGVuIHRoZSBmbGFnIGlzIGNsZWFy ICh6ZXJvKSwgdGhlIAogICBwYXRoIHRoYXQgaXMgcmV0dXJuZWQgTVVTVCBOT1QgYmUgYW4gaW50 ZXItbGF5ZXIgcGF0aC4gCgogICBUaGUgSSBmbGFnIGlzIHVzZWQgYnkgYSBQQ0UgaW4gYSBQQ1Jl cCBtZXNzYWdlIHRvIGluZGljYXRlIHRvIGEgUENDIAogICB3aGV0aGVyIHRoZSBwYXRoIHJldHVy bmVkIGlzIGFuIGludGVyLWxheWVyIHBhdGguIFdoZW4gdGhlIEkgZmxhZyBpcyAKICAgc2V0IChv bmUpLCB0aGUgcGF0aCBpcyBhbiBpbnRlci1sYXllciBwYXRoLiBXaGVuIGl0IGlzIGNsZWFyICh6 ZXJvKSwgCiAgIHRoZSBwYXRoIGlzIGNvbnRhaW5lZCB3aXRoaW4gYSBzaW5nbGUgbGF5ZXIgZWl0 aGVyIGJlY2F1c2UgaW50ZXItCiAgIGxheWVyIHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRpb24gd2FzIG5vdCBwZXJm b3JtZWQgb3IgYmVjYXVzZSBhIG1vbm8tbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCAKICAgKHdpdGhvdXQgYW55IHZpcnR1 YWwgVEUgbGluayBhbmQgd2l0aG91dCBhbnkgbG9vc2UgaG9wIHRoYXQgc3BhbnMgdGhlIAogICBs b3dlci1sYXllciBuZXR3b3JrKSB3YXMgZm91bmQgbm90d2l0aHN0YW5kaW5nIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2Yg aW50ZXItbGF5ZXIgCiAgIHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRpb24uIAoKICAgTSBmbGFnICgxIGJpdCk6IFRo ZSBNIGZsYWcgaXMgdXNlZCBieSBhIFBDQyBpbiBhIFBDUmVxIG1lc3NhZ2UgdG8gCiAgIGluZGlj YXRlIHRvIGEgUENFIHdoZXRoZXIgbW9uby1sYXllciBwYXRoIG9yIG11bHRpLWxheWVyIHBhdGgg aXMgCgogCiAKRS4gT2tpICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAyMDExICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSA1XSAKDApkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXllci1leHQt MDUudHh0ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSnVuZSAyMDExIAogICAgCgogICByZXF1ZXN0 ZWQuIFdoZW4gdGhlIE0gZmxhZyBpcyBzZXQgKG9uZSksIG11bHRpLWxheWVyIHBhdGggaXMgCiAg IHJlcXVlc3RlZC4gV2hlbiBpdCBpcyBjbGVhciAoemVybyksIG1vbm8tbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBpcyBy ZXF1ZXN0ZWQuIAoKICAgVGhlIE0gZmxhZyBpcyB1c2VkIGJ5IGEgUENFIGluIGEgUENSZXAgbWVz c2FnZSB0byBpbmRpY2F0ZSB0byBhIFBDQyAKICAgd2hldGhlciBtb25vLWxheWVyIHBhdGggb3Ig bXVsdGktbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBpcyByZXR1cm5lZC4gV2hlbiBNIGZsYWcgCiAgIGlzIHNldCAob25l KSwgbXVsdGktbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBpcyByZXR1cm5lZC4gV2hlbiBNIGZsYWcgaXMgc2V0ICh6ZXJv KSwgCiAgIG1vbm8tbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBpcyByZXR1cm5lZC4gCgogICBJZiB0aGUgSSBmbGFnIGlz IGNsZWFyICh6ZXJvKSwgdGhlIE0gZmxhZyBoYXMgbm8gbWVhbmluZyBhbmQgTVVTVCBiZSAKICAg aWdub3JlZC4gCgogICBbUENFLUlOVEVSLUxBWUVSLVJFUV0gZGVzY3JpYmVzIHR3byBzdWItb3B0 aW9ucyBmb3IgbW9uby1sYXllciBwYXRoLiAKCiAgIC0gQSBtb25vLWxheWVyIHBhdGggdGhhdCBp cyBzcGVjaWZpZWQgYnkgc3RyaWN0IGhvcHMuIFRoZSBwYXRoIG1heSAKICAgaW5jbHVkZSB2aXJ0 dWFsIFRFIGxpbmtzLiAKCiAgIC0gQSBtb25vLWxheWVyIHBhdGggdGhhdCBpbmNsdWRlcyBsb29z ZSBob3BzIHRoYXQgc3BhbiB0aGUgbG93ZXItCiAgIGxheWVyIG5ldHdvcmsuIAoKICAgVGhlIGNo b2ljZSBvZiB0aGlzIHN1Yi1vcHRpb24gY2FuIGJlIHNwZWNpZmllZCBieSB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIE8g ZmxhZyAKICAgaW4gdGhlIFJQIG9iamVjdCBzcGVjaWZpZWQgaW4gW1JGQzU0NDBdLiAKCiAgIFQg ZmxhZyAoMSBiaXQpOiBUaGUgVCBmbGFnIGlzIHVzZWQgYnkgYSBQQ0MgaW4gYSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNz YWdlIHRvIAogICBpbmRpY2F0ZSB0byBhIFBDRSB3aGV0aGVyIHRyaWdnZXJlZCBzaWduYWxpbmcg aXMgYWxsb3dlZC4gV2hlbiB0aGUgVCAKICAgZmxhZyBpcyBzZXQgKG9uZSksIHRyaWdnZXJlZCBz aWduYWxpbmcgaXMgYWxsb3dlZC4gV2hlbiBpdCBpcyBjbGVhciAKICAgKHplcm8pLCB0cmlnZ2Vy ZWQgc2lnbmFsaW5nIGlzIG5vdCBhbGxvd2VkLiAKCiAgIFRoZSBUIGZsYWcgaXMgdXNlZCBieSBh IFBDRSBpbiBhIFBDUmVwIG1lc3NhZ2UgdG8gaW5kaWNhdGUgdG8gYSBQQ0MgCiAgIHdoZXRoZXIg dHJpZ2dlcmVkIHNpZ25hbGluZyBpcyByZXF1aXJlZCB0byBzdXBwb3J0IHRoZSByZXR1cm5lZCBw YXRoLiAKICAgV2hlbiB0aGUgVCBmbGFnIGlzIHNldCAob25lKSwgdHJpZ2dlcmVkIHNpZ25hbGlu ZyBpcyByZXF1aXJlZC4gV2hlbiAKICAgaXQgaXMgY2xlYXIgKHplcm8pLCB0cmlnZ2VyZWQgc2ln bmFsaW5nIGlzIG5vdCByZXF1aXJlZC4gCgogICBOb3RlIHRoYXQgdHJpZ2dlcmVkIHNpZ25hbGlu ZyBpcyB1c2VkIHRvIHN1cHBvcnQgaGllcmFyY2hpY2FsIAogICBbUkZDNDIwNl0gb3Igc3RpdGNo ZWQgW1JGQzUxNTBdIExTUHMgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIHRoZSBwaHlzaWNhbCAKICAgYXR0cmlidXRl cyBvZiB0aGUgbmV0d29yayBsYXllcnMuIAoKICAgSWYgdGhlIEkgZmxhZyBpcyBjbGVhciAoemVy byksIHRoZSBUIGZsYWcgaGFzIG5vIG1lYW5pbmcgYW5kIE1VU1QgYmUgCiAgIGlnbm9yZWQuIAoK ICAgTm90ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBJIGZsYWcgYW5kIE0gZmxhZyBkaWZmZXIgaW4gdGhlIGZvbGxvd2lu ZyB3YXlzLiAtIFdoZW4gCiAgIHRoZSBJIGZsYWcgaXMgY2xlYXIgKHplcm8pLCB2aXJ0dWFsIFRF IGxpbmtzIG11c3Qgbm90IGJlIHVzZWQgaW4gcGF0aCAKICAgY29tcHV0YXRpb24uIEluIGFkZGl0 aW9uLCBsb29zZSBob3BzIHRoYXQgc3BhbiB0aGUgbG93ZXItbGF5ZXIgCiAgIG5ldHdvcmsgbXVz dCBub3QgYmUgc3BlY2lmaWVkLiBPbmx5IHJlZ3VsYXIgVEUgbGlua3MgZnJvbSB0aGUgc2FtZSAK ICAgbGF5ZXIgbWF5IGJlIHVzZWQuIAoKICAgLSBXaGVuIHRoZSBJIGZsYWcgaXMgc2V0IChvbmUp LCB0aGUgTSBmbGFnIGlzIGNsZWFyICh6ZXJvKSwgYW5kIHRoZSBUIAogICBmbGFnIGlzIHNldCAo b25lKSwgdmlydHVhbCBURSBsaW5rcyBhcmUgYWxsb3dlZCBpbiBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uLiAK IAogCkUuIE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgW1BhZ2UgNl0gCgwKZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0LTA1LnR4 dCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEp1bmUgMjAxMSAKICAgIAoKICAgSW4gYWRkaXRpb24s IHdoZW4gdGhlIE8gZmxhZyBvZiB0aGUgUlAgb2JqZWN0IGlzIHNldCwgbG9vc2UgaG9wcyB0aGF0 IAogICBzcGFuIHRoZSBsb3dlci1sYXllciBuZXR3b3JrIG1heSBiZSBzcGVjaWZpZWQuIFRoaXMg d2lsbCBpbml0aWF0ZSAKICAgbG93ZXItbGF5ZXIgTFNQIHNldHVwLCB0aHVzIGludGVyLWxheWVy IHBhdGggaXMgc2V0dXAgZXZlbiB0aG91Z2ggdGhlIAogICBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIHJlc3Vs dCBmcm9tIGEgUENFIHRvIGEgUENDIGluY2x1ZGUgaG9wcyBmcm9tIHRoZSAKICAgc2FtZSBsYXll ciBvbmx5LiAKCiAgIC0gSG93ZXZlciwgd2hlbiB0aGUgSSBmbGFnIGlzIHNldCAob25lKSwgdGhl IE0gZmxhZyBpcyBjbGVhciAoemVybyksIAogICBhbmQgdGhlIFQgZmxhZyBpcyBjbGVhciAoemVy byksIHNpbmNlIHRyaWdnZXJlZCBzaWduYWxpbmcgaXMgbm90IAogICBhbGxvd2VkLCB2aXJ0dWFs IFRFIGxpbmtzIG11c3Qgbm90IGJlIHVzZWQgaW4gcGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbi4gSW4gCiAgIGFk ZGl0aW9uLCBsb29zZSBob3BzIHRoYXQgc3BhbiB0aGUgbG93ZXItbGF5ZXIgbmV0d29yayBtdXN0 IG5vdCBiZSAKICAgc3BlY2lmaWVkLiBUaGVyZWZvcmUsIHRoaXMgaXMgZXF1aXZhbGVudCB0byB0 aGUgSSBmbGFnIGJlaW5nIGNsZWFyIAogICAoemVybykuIAoKICAgUmVzZXJ2ZWQgYml0cyBvZiB0 aGUgSU5URVItTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0IFNIT1VMRCBiZSB0cmFuc21pdHRlZCBhcyB6ZXJvIAogICBh bmQgU0hPVUxEIGJlIGlnbm9yZWQgb24gcmVjZWlwdC4gQSBQQ0UgdGhhdCBmb3J3YXJkcyBhIHBh dGggCiAgIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIHJlcXVlc3QgdG8gb3RoZXIgUENFcyBTSE9VTEQgcHJlc2VydmUg dGhlIHNldHRpbmdzIG9mIAogICByZXNlcnZlZCBiaXRzIGluIHRoZSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNzYWdlcyBp dCBzZW5kcyBhbmQgaW4gdGhlIFBDUmVwIAogICBtZXNzYWdlcyBpdCBmb3J3YXJkcyB0byBQQ0Nz LiAKCjMuMi4gU1dJVENILUxBWUVSIE9iamVjdCAKCiAgIFRoZSBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0 IGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsIG9uIGEgUENSZXEgbWVzc2FnZSBhbmQgc3BlY2lmaWVzIAogICBzd2l0Y2hp bmcgbGF5ZXJzIGluIHdoaWNoIGEgcGF0aCBNVVNULCBvciBNVVNUIE5PVCwgYmUgZXN0YWJsaXNo ZWQuIEEgCiAgIHN3aXRjaGluZyBsYXllciBpcyBleHByZXNzZWQgYXMgYSBzd2l0Y2hpbmcgdHlw ZSBhbmQgZW5jb2RpbmcgdHlwZS4gCiogIFRoZSBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0IE1BWSBiZSB1 c2VkIG9uIGEgUENSZXEgYW5kIGFuIElOVEVSLQoqICBMQVlFUiBvYmplY3QgTUFZIE5PVCBiZSBw cmVzZW50IG9uIHRoZSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNzYWdlLiAKCiogIFdoZW4gdGhlIFNXSVRDSC1MQVlFUiBs YXllciBpcyBwcmVzZW50IGFuZCBhIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIGlzIG5vdCAKKiAgcHJlc2VudCB0aGUg UENFIE1VU1QgcHJvY2VzcyBhcyB0aG91Z2ggaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiAK KiAgaGFkIGJlZW4gZXhwbGljaXRseSBkaXNhbGxvd2VkIGFuZCBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgU0hPVUxE IE5PVCBoYXZlIG1vcmUgCiogIHRoYW4gb25lIHJvdyB3aXRoIEkgYml0IHNldC4KCiAgIFRoZSBT V0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0IGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsIG9uIGEgUENSZXAgbWVzc2FnZSwgd2hlcmUg aXQgaXMgCiAgIHVzZWQgd2l0aCB0aGUgTk8tUEFUSCBvYmplY3QgaW4gdGhlIGNhc2Ugb2YgdW5z dWNjZXNzZnVsIHBhdGggCiAgIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIHRvIGluZGljYXRlIHRoZSBzZXQgb2YgY29u c3RyYWludHMgdGhhdCBjb3VsZCBub3QgYmUgCiAgIHNhdGlzZmllZC4gCgogICBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZ RVIgT2JqZWN0LUNsYXNzIGlzIHRvIGJlIGFzc2lnbmVkIGJ5IElBTkEgKHJlY29tbWVuZGVkIAog ICB2YWx1ZT0xOSkgCgogICBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgT2JqZWN0LVR5cGUgaXMgdG8gYmUgYXNzaWdu ZWQgYnkgSUFOQSAocmVjb21tZW5kZWQgCiAgIHZhbHVlPTEpIAoKICAgVGhlIGZvcm1hdCBvZiB0 aGUgU1dJVENILUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCBib2R5IGlzIGFzIGZvbGxvd3M6IAoKCgoKCgoKIAogCkUu IE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgW1BhZ2UgN10gCgwKZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0LTA1LnR4dCAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEp1bmUgMjAxMSAKICAgIAoKICAgIDAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDMgCiAgICAwIDEgMiAz IDQgNSA2IDcgOCA5IDAgMSAyIDMgNCA1IDYgNyA4IDkgMCAxIDIgMyA0IDUgNiA3IDggOSAwIDEg CiAgICstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rIAogICB8IExTUCBFbmMuIFR5cGUgfFN3aXRjaGluZyBUeXBlIHwgUmVzZXJ2 ZWQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxJfCAKICAgKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSsgCiAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgLiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IAogICAv LyAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC4gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAvLyAKICAgfCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAuICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHwgCiAgICstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rIAogICB8IExTUCBFbmMuIFR5cGUgfFN3 aXRjaGluZyBUeXBlIHwgUmVzZXJ2ZWQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHxJfCAKICAgKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSsgCiAgICAKCiAgIEVhY2ggcm93IGluZGljYXRlcyBhIHN3aXRjaGluZyB0eXBlIGFuZCBlbmNv ZGluZyB0eXBlIHRoYXQgbXVzdCBvciAKICAgbXVzdCBub3QgYmUgdXNlZCBmb3Igc3BlY2lmaWVk IGxheWVyKHMpIGluIHRoZSBjb21wdXRlZCBwYXRoLiAKCiAgIFRoZSBmb3JtYXQgaXMgYmFzZWQg b24gW1JGQzM0NzFdLCBhbmQgaGFzIGVxdWl2YWxlbnQgc2VtYW50aWNzLiAKCiAgIExTUCBFbmNv ZGluZyBUeXBlICg4IGJpdHMpOiBzZWUgW1JGQzM0NzFdIGZvciBhIGRlc2NyaXB0aW9uIG9mIAog ICBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzLiAKCiAgIFN3aXRjaGluZyBUeXBlICg4IGJpdHMpOiBzZWUgW1JGQzM0NzFd IGZvciBhIGRlc2NyaXB0aW9uIG9mIAogICBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzLiAKCiAgIEkgZmxhZyAoMSBiaXQp OiB0aGUgSSBmbGFnIGluZGljYXRlcyB3aGV0aGVyIGEgbGF5ZXIgd2l0aCB0aGUgCiAgIHNwZWNp ZmllZCBzd2l0Y2hpbmcgdHlwZSBhbmQgZW5jb2RpbmcgdHlwZSBtdXN0IG9yIG11c3Qgbm90IGJl IHVzZWQgCiAgIGJ5IHRoZSBjb21wdXRlZCBwYXRoLiBXaGVuIHRoZSBJIGZsYWcgaXMgc2V0IChv bmUpLCB0aGUgY29tcHV0ZWQgcGF0aCAKICAgTVVTVCB0cmF2ZXJzZSBhIGxheWVyIHdpdGggdGhl IHNwZWNpZmllZCBzd2l0Y2hpbmcgdHlwZSBhbmQgZW5jb2RpbmcgCiAgIHR5cGUuIFdoZW4gdGhl IEkgZmxhZyBpcyBjbGVhciAoemVybyksIHRoZSBjb21wdXRlZCBwYXRoIE1VU1QgTk9UIAogICBl bnRlciBvciB0cmF2ZXJzZSBhbnkgbGF5ZXIgd2l0aCB0aGUgc3BlY2lmaWVkIHN3aXRjaGluZyB0 eXBlIGFuZCAKICAgZW5jb2RpbmcgdHlwZS4gCgogICBXaGVuIGEgY29tYmluYXRpb24gb2Ygc3dp dGNoaW5nIHR5cGUgYW5kIGVuY29kaW5nIHR5cGUgaXMgbm90IAogICBpbmNsdWRlZCBpbiBTV0lU Q0gtTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0LCB0aGUgY29tcHV0ZWQgcGF0aCBNQVkgdHJhdmVyc2UgYSAKICAgbGF5 ZXIgd2l0aCB0aGF0IGNvbWJpbmF0aW9uIG9mIHN3aXRjaGluZyB0eXBlIGFuZCBlbmNvZGluZyB0 eXBlLiAKCiAgIEEgUENDIG1heSB3YW50IHRvIHNwZWNpZnkgb25seSBhIFN3aXRjaGluZyBUeXBl IGFuZCBub3QgYW4gTFNQIAogICBFbmNvZGluZyBUeXBlLiBJbiB0aGlzIGNhc2UsIHRoZSBMU1Ag RW5jb2RpbmcgVHlwZSBpcyBzZXQgdG8gemVyby4gCgozLjMuIFJFUS1BREFQLUNBUCBPYmplY3Qg CgogICBUaGUgUkVRLUFEQVAtQ0FQIG9iamVjdCBpcyBvcHRpb25hbCBhbmQgaXMgdXNlZCB0byBz cGVjaWZ5IGEgCiAgIHJlcXVlc3RlZCBhZGFwdGF0aW9uIGNhcGFiaWxpdHkgZm9yIGJvdGggZW5k cyBvZiB0aGUgbG93ZXIgbGF5ZXIgTFNQLiAKICAgVGhlIFJFUS1BREFQLUNBUCBvYmplY3QgaXMg dXNlZCBpbiBhIFBDUmVxIG1lc3NhZ2UgZm9yIGludGVyLVBDRSAKICAgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiwg d2hlcmUgdGhlIFBDRSB0aGF0IGlzIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxlIGZvciBjb21wdXRpbmcgaGlnaGVyIAog ICBsYXllciBwYXRocyBhY3RzIGFzIGEgUENDIHRvIHJlcXVlc3QgYSBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9u IGZyb20gYSBQQ0UgCiAgIHRoYXQgaXMgcmVzcG9uc2libGUgZm9yIGNvbXB1dGluZyBsb3dlciBs YXllciBwYXRocy4gCiAKIApFLiBPa2kgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVzIERlY2VtYmVy IDIwMTEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDhdIAoMCmRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcGNlLWludGVyLWxh eWVyLWV4dC0wNS50eHQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBKdW5lIDIwMTEgCiAgICAKCiAg IFRoZSBSRVEtQURBUC1DQVAgb2JqZWN0IGlzIHVzZWQgaW4gYSBQQ1JlcCBtZXNzYWdlIGluIGNh c2Ugb2YgCiAgIHVuc3VjY2Vzc2Z1bCBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIChpbiB0aGlzIGNhc2UsIHRo ZSBQQ1JlcCBtZXNzYWdlIGFsc28gCiAgIGNvbnRhaW5zIGEgTk8tUEFUSCBvYmplY3QsIGFuZCB0 aGUgUkVRLUFEQVAtQ0FQIG9iamVjdCBpcyB1c2VkIHRvIAogICBpbmRpY2F0ZSB0aGUgc2V0IG9m IGNvbnN0cmFpbnRzIHRoYXQgY291bGQgbm90IGJlIHNhdGlzZmllZCkuIAoKICAgVGhlIFJFUS1B REFQLUNBUCBvYmplY3QgTUFZIGJlIHVzZWQgaW4gYSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNzYWdlIGluIGEgbW9uby0K ICAgbGF5ZXIgbmV0d29yayB0byBzcGVjaWZ5IGEgcmVxdWVzdGVkIGFkYXB0YXRpb24gY2FwYWJp bGl0eSBmb3IgYm90aCAKICAgZW5kcyBvZiB0aGUgTFNQLiBJbiB0aGlzIGNhc2UsIGl0IE1BWSBi ZSBjYXJyaWVkIHdpdGhvdXQgSU5URVItTEFZRVIgCiAgIE9iamVjdC4gCgogICBSRVEtQURBUC1D QVAgT2JqZWN0LUNsYXNzIGlzIHRvIGJlIGFzc2lnbmVkIGJ5IElBTkEgKHJlY29tbWVuZGVkIAog ICB2YWx1ZT0yMCkgCgogICBSRVEtQURBUC1DQVAgT2JqZWN0LVR5cGUgaXMgdG8gYmUgYXNzaWdu ZWQgYnkgSUFOQSAocmVjb21tZW5kZWQgCiAgIHZhbHVlPTEpIAoKICAgVGhlIGZvcm1hdCBvZiB0 aGUgUkVRLUFEQVAtQ0FQIG9iamVjdCBib2R5IGlzIGFzIGZvbGxvd3M6IAoKICAgIDAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAyICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDMgCiAg ICAwIDEgMiAzIDQgNSA2IDcgOCA5IDAgMSAyIDMgNCA1IDYgNyA4IDkgMCAxIDIgMyA0IDUgNiA3 IDggOSAwIDEgCiAgICstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rIAogICB8IFN3aXRjaGluZyBDYXAgfCAgIEVuY29kaW5nICAg IHwgUmVzZXJ2ZWQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAKICAgKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSsgCiAgICAKCiog ICBUaGUgZm9ybWF0IGlzIGJhc2VkIG9uIFtSRkM2MDAxXSBhbmQgaGFzIGVxdWl2YWxlbnQgc2Vt YW50aWNzIGFzCiogICB0aGUgSUFDRCBVcHBlciBTQyBhbmQgTG93ZXIgU0MgLiAKCiogQ29tbWVu dCA6IGlzIHRoZSBHLVBJRCBuZWVkZWQgdG8gcmVmbGVjdCB0aGluZ3MgbGlrZSB0cmFucG9ydGlu ZyAKKiBFdGhlcm5ldCBvdmVyIE9UTiwgdGhlcmUgaXMgc2V2ZXJhbCBwb3NzaWJsZSBtYXBwaW5n IHJlcHJlc2VudGVkCiogYnkgRy1QSUQsIHRoaXMgbWlnaHQgYmUgY29uc2lkZXJlZCBpbiBjYXNl IG9mIE1ELVBDRSByZXF1ZXN0cyBmb3IKKiB0aGUgT1ROIGxheWVyCiogT3IgZGlkIEkgbWlzcyBz b21ldGhpbmcgPwoqCgogICBTd2l0Y2hpbmcgQ2FwYWJpbGl0eSAoOCBiaXRzKTogc2VlIFtSRkM0 MjAzXSBmb3IgYSBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbiBvZiAKICAgcGFyYW1ldGVycy4gCgogICBFbmNvZGluZyAo OCBiaXRzKTogc2VlIFtSRkMzNDcxXSBmb3IgYSBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbiBvZiBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzLiAK CiAgIEEgUENDIG1heSB3YW50IHRvIHNwZWNpZnkgYSBTd2l0Y2hpbmcgQ2FwYWJpbGl0eSwgYnV0 IG5vdCBhbiBFbmNvZGluZy4gCiAgIEluIHRoaXMgY2FzZSwgdGhlIEVuY29kaW5nIE1VU1QgYmUg c2V0IHplcm8uIAoKMy40LiBOZXcgTWV0cmljIFR5cGVzIAoKICAgVHdvIG5ldyBtZXRyaWMgdHlw ZXMgYXJlIGRlZmluZWQgZm9yIHRoZSBNRVRSSUMgb2JqZWN0IGluIFBDRVAuIAoKICAgVHlwZSAx MSAoc3VnZ2VzdGVkIHZhbHVlLCB0byBiZSBhc3NpZ25lZCBieSBJQU5BKTogTnVtYmVyIG9mIAog ICBhZGFwdGF0aW9ucyBvbiBhIHBhdGguIAoKICAgVHlwZSAxMiAoc3VnZ2VzdGVkIHZhbHVlLCB0 byBiZSBhc3NpZ25lZCBieSBJQU5BKTogTnVtYmVyIG9mIGxheWVycyAKICAgdG8gYmUgaW52b2x2 ZWQgb24gYSBwYXRoLiAKCiAgICAKCiAKIApFLiBPa2kgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVz IERlY2VtYmVyIDIwMTEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDldIAoMCmRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcGNl LWludGVyLWxheWVyLWV4dC0wNS50eHQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBKdW5lIDIwMTEg CiAgICAKCjMuNS4gRVJPIHN1Yi1vYmplY3QgIAoKKiBDeXJpbCA6IG5vdCBuZWVkZWQgYXQgYWxs IGlmIFJTVlAgZG9lcyBub3Qgc3VwcG9ydHMgaXQsIAoqIHRoZSBQQ0VQIGV4dGVuc2lvbiBzaG91 bGQgbm90IGRlZmluZSBzdWNoIEVSTyBleHRlbnNpb25zLCBpdCBNVVNUIGJlIGEgCiogY2NhbXAg ZG9jdW1lbnQuIEZvciB0aGUgc2FrZSBvZiBjbGFyaXR5IEkgd291bGQgcHV0IDogCioKKiAgYSBQ Q0UgTUFZIGV4cGxpY2l0bHkgaW5kaWNhdGUgdG8gYSBQQ0MgdGhlIGxheWVyIGJvdW5kYXJpZXMg YnkgdXNpbmcgCiogdGhlIFNFUlZFUl9MQVlFUl9JTkZPIHN1Yi1vYmplY3QgZGVmaW5lZCBpbiBk cmFmdC16aGFuZy1jY2FtcC1nbXBscy1oLWxzcC1tbG4tMDMKKiAgCgogICBBIG5ldyBFUk8gc3Vi LW9iamVjdCBuYW1lZCBTRVJWRVJfTEFZRVJfSU5GTyBzdWItb2JqZWN0IGlzIGRlZmluZWQgaW4g CiAgIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuIFRoaXMgc3ViLW9iamVjdCBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZCBmb3Igc3BlY2lm eWluZyB0aGUgZGV0YWlsIAogICBzZXJ2ZXIgbGF5ZXIgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gb2YgYSBzZXJ2ZXIg bGF5ZXIgcGF0aCwgZS5nLiB0aGUgc3dpdGNoaW5nIAogICBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IGFuZCBlbmNvZGlu ZyBvZiB0aGUgc2VydmVyIGxheWVyIHBhdGguICAKCiAgICAgMCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAx ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDIgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgMyAKICAgICAwIDEgMiAzIDQg NSA2IDcgOCA5IDAgMSAyIDMgNCA1IDYgNyA4IDkgMCAxIDIgMyA0IDUgNiA3IDggOSAwIDEgCiAg ICArLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKyAKICAgIHxMfCAgICBUeXBlICAgICB8ICAgICBMZW5ndGggICAgfCAgICAgICAg ICAgUmVzZXJ2ZWQgICAgICAgICAgICB8IAogICAgKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0r LSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSsgCiAgICB8IFN3aXRjaGluZyBD YXAgfCAgIEVuY29kaW5nICAgIHwgICAgICAgICAgIFJlc2VydmVkICAgICAgICAgICAgfCAKICAg ICstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rIAogICAgfiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgT3B0aW9uYWwgVExWcyAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIH4gCiAgICArLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSst Ky0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKy0rLSstKyAKICAgIAoKICAgVGhlIHR5cGUg b2YgU0VSVkVSX0xBWUVSX0lORk8gc3ViLW9iamVjdCBpcyB0byBiZSBhc3NpZ25lZCBieSBJQU5B LiAgCgogICBMOiBUaGUgTCBiaXQgU0hPVUxEIE5PVCBiZSBzZXQsIHNvIHRoYXQgdGhlIHN1Ym9i amVjdCByZXByZXNlbnRzIGEgCiAgIHN0cmljdCBob3AgaW4gdGhlIGV4cGxpY2l0IHJvdXRlLiAK CiAgIFN3aXRjaGluZyBDYXBhYmlsaXR5ICg4IGJpdHMpOiBzZWUgW1JGQzQyMDNdIGZvciBhIGRl c2NyaXB0aW9uIG9mIAogICBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzLiAgCgogICBFbmNvZGluZyAoOCBiaXRzKTogc2Vl IFtSRkMzNDcxXSBmb3IgYSBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbiBvZiBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzLiAKCiAgIE9wdGlvbmFs IFRMVnM6IE9wdGlvbmFsIFRMVnMgbWF5IGJlIGluY2x1ZGVkIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUgb2JqZWN0IHRv IAogICBzcGVjaWZ5IG1vcmUgc3BlY2lmaWMgc2VydmVyIGxheWVyIHBhdGggaW5mb3JtYXRpb24g KGUuZy4sIHRyYWZmaWMgCiAgIHBhcmFtZXRlcnMpLiAgCgogICBUaGlzIHN1Yi1vYmplY3QgTUFZ IGJlIGFkZGVkIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IGJlaGluZCB0aGUgbm9kZSBvciBsaW5rIAogICBhZGRyZXNz IHN1Yi1vYmplY3RzIG9mIHRoZSB0d28gZWRnZSBub2RlcyBvZiBhIHNlcnZpY2UgcGF0aC4gIAoK NC4gUHJvY2VkdXJlcyAgCgo0LjEuIFBhdGggQ29tcHV0YXRpb24gUmVxdWVzdCAKCiAgIEEgUEND IHJlcXVlc3RzIG9yIGFsbG93cyBpbnRlci1sYXllciBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIGluIGEgUENS ZXEgCiAgIG1lc3NhZ2UgYnkgaW5jbHVkaW5nIHRoZSBJTlRFUi1MQVlFUiBvYmplY3Qgd2l0aCB0 aGUgSSBmbGFnIHNldC4gVGhlIAogICBJTlRFUi1MQVlFUiBvYmplY3QgaW5kaWNhdGVzIHdoZXRo ZXIgaW50ZXItbGF5ZXIgcGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiBpcyAKICAgYWxsb3dlZCwgd2hpY2ggcGF0 aCB0eXBlIGlzIHJlcXVlc3RlZCwgYW5kIHdoZXRoZXIgdHJpZ2dlcmVkIAogICBzaWduYWxpbmcg aXMgYWxsb3dlZC4gCgogKiBUaGUgU1dJVENILUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCwgIGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsbHkg dXNlZCB0byBzcGVjaWZ5IHRoZSAKIAogCkUuIE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMg RGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSAxMF0gCgwKZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2Ut aW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0LTA1LnR4dCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEp1bmUgMjAxMSAK ICAgIAoKICAgc3dpdGNoaW5nIHR5cGVzIGFuZCBlbmNvZGluZyB0eXBlcyB0aGF0IGRlZmluZSBs YXllcnMgdGhhdCBtdXN0LCBvciAKICAgbXVzdCBub3QsIGJlIHVzZWQgaW4gdGhlIGNvbXB1dGVk IHBhdGguIFdoZW4gdGhlIFNXSVRDSC1MQVlFUiBvYmplY3QgCiAgIGlzIHVzZWQgd2l0aCB0aGUg SU5URVItTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0IEkgZmxhZyBjbGVhciAoemVybyksIGludGVyLWxheWVyIAogICBw YXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIGlzIG5vdCBhbGxvd2VkLCBidXQgY29uc3RyYWludHMgc3BlY2lmaWVk IGluIHRoZSAKICAgU1dJVENILUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCBhcHBseS4gRXhhbXBsZSB1c2FnZSBpbmNs dWRlcyBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIGluIAogICBhIHNpbmdsZSBsYXllciBHTVBMUyBuZXR3b3Jr LiAKCiAgIFRoZSBSRVEtQURBUC1DQVAgb2JqZWN0IGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsbHkgdXNlZCB0byBzcGVj aWZ5IHRoZSBpbnRlcmZhY2UgCiAgIHN3aXRjaGluZyBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IG9mIGJvdGggZW5kcyBv ZiB0aGUgbG93ZXIgbGF5ZXIgTFNQLiBUaGUgUkVRLQogICBBREFQLUNBUCBvYmplY3QgaXMgdXNl ZCBpbiBpbnRlci1QQ0UgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiwgd2hlcmUgdGhlIFBDRSAKICAgdGhhdCBpcyBy ZXNwb25zaWJsZSBmb3IgY29tcHV0aW5nIGhpZ2hlciBsYXllciBwYXRocyBtYWtlcyBhIHJlcXVl c3QgCiAgIGFzIGEgUENDIHRvIGEgUENFIHRoYXQgaXMgcmVzcG9uc2libGUgZm9yIGNvbXB1dGlu ZyBsb3dlciBsYXllciBwYXRocy4gCiAgIEFsdGVybmF0aXZlbHksIHRoZSBSRVEtQURBUC1DQVAg b2JqZWN0IG1heSBiZSB1c2VkIGluIHRoZSBOTVMtVk5UTSAKICAgbW9kZWwsIHdoZXJlIHRoZSBW TlRNIG1ha2VzIGEgcmVxdWVzdCBhcyBhIFBDQyB0byBhIFBDRSB0aGF0IGlzIAogICByZXNwb25z aWJsZSBmb3IgY29tcHV0aW5nIGxvd2VyLWxheWVyIHBhdGhzLiAKCiAgIFRoZSBNRVRSSUMgb2Jq ZWN0IGlzIG9wdGlvbmFsbHkgdXNlZCB0byBzcGVjaWZ5IG1ldHJpYyB0eXBlcyB0byBiZSAKICAg b3B0aW1pemVkIG9yIGJvdW5kZWQuIFdoZW4gbWV0cmljIHR5cGUgMTEgKFRCQyBieSBJQU5BKSBp cyB1c2VkLCBpdCAKICAgaW5kaWNhdGVzIHRoYXQgcGF0aCBjb21wdXRhdGlvbiBNVVNUIG1pbmlt aXplIG9yIGJvdW5kIHRoZSBudW1iZXIgb2YgCiAgIGFkYXB0YXRpb25zIG9uIGEgcGF0aC4gV2hl biBtZXRyaWMgdHlwZSAxMiAoVEJDIGJ5IElBTkEpIGlzIHVzZWQsIGl0IAogICBpbmRpY2F0ZXMg dGhhdCBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIE1VU1QgbWluaW1pemUgb3IgYm91bmQgdGhlIG51bWJlciBv ZiAKICAgbGF5ZXJzIHRvIGJlIGludm9sdmVkIG9uIGEgcGF0aC4gCgogICBGdXJ0aGVybW9yZSwg aW4gb3JkZXIgdG8gYWxsb3cgZGlmZmVyZW50IG9iamVjdGl2ZSBmdW5jdGlvbnMgdG8gYmUgCiAg IGFwcGxpZWQgd2l0aGluIGRpZmZlcmVudCBuZXR3b3JrIGxheWVycywgbXVsdGlwbGUgT0Ygb2Jq ZWN0cyBNQVkgYmUgCiAgIHByZXNlbnQuIEluIHN1Y2ggYSBjYXNlLCB0aGUgZmlyc3QgT0Ygb2Jq ZWN0IHNwZWNpZmllcyBhbiBvYmplY3RpdmUgCiAgIGZ1bmN0aW9uIGZvciB0aGUgaGlnaGVyLWxh eWVyIG5ldHdvcmssIGFuZCBzdWJzZXF1ZW50IE9GIG9iamVjdHMgCiAgIHNwZWNpZnkgb2JqZWN0 aW9uIGZ1bmN0aW9ucyBvZiB0aGUgc3Vic2VxdWVudCBsb3dlci1sYXllciBuZXR3b3Jrcy4gCgo0 LjIuIFBhdGggQ29tcHV0YXRpb24gUmVwbHkgCgogICBJbiB0aGUgY2FzZSBvZiBzdWNjZXNzZnVs IHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRpb24sIHRoZSByZXF1ZXN0ZWQgUENFIHJlcGxpZXMgCiAgIHRvIHRoZSBy ZXF1ZXN0aW5nIFBDQyBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVyLWxheWVyIHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRpb24gcmVzdWx0 IGluIAogICBhIFBDUmVwIG1lc3NhZ2UgdGhhdCBNQVkgaW5jbHVkZSB0aGUgSU5URVItTEFZRVIg b2JqZWN0LiBXaGVuIHRoZSAKICAgSU5URVItTEFZRVIgb2JqZWN0IGlzIGluY2x1ZGVkIGluIGEg UENSZXAgbWVzc2FnZSwgdGhlIEkgZmxhZywgTSBmbGFnLCAKICAgYW5kIFQgZmxhZyBpbmRpY2F0 ZSBzZW1hbnRpY3Mgb2YgdGhlIHBhdGggYXMgZGVzY3JpYmVkIGluIFNlY3Rpb24gMy4xLiAKICAg RnVydGhlcm1vcmUsIHdoZW4gdGhlIEMgZmxhZyBvZiB0aGUgTUVUUklDIG9iamVjdCBpbiBhIFBD UmVxIGlzIHNldCwgCiAgIHRoZSBNRVRSSUMgb2JqZWN0IE1VU1QgYmUgaW5jbHVkZWQgaW4gdGhl IFBDUmVwIHRvIHByb3ZpZGUgdGhlIAogICBjb21wdXRlZCBtZXRyaWMgdmFsdWUsIGFzIHNwZWNp ZmllZCBpbiBbUkZDNTQ0MF0uIAoKICAgUENFIE1BWSBzcGVjaWZ5IHRoZSBzZXJ2ZXIgbGF5ZXIg cGF0aCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBpbiB0aGUgRVJPLiBJbiB0aGlzIAogICBjYXNlLCB0aGUgc2VydmVy IGxheWVyIHBhdGggaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY291bGQgYmUgZGVtYXJjYXRlZCBieSB0d28gCiAgIFNF UlZFUl9MQVlFUl9JTkZPIHN1Yi1vYmplY3RzIGluIHRoZSBFUk8gb2JqZWN0LiBUaGUgc2VydmVy IGxheWVyIAogICBwYXRoIHNwZWNpZmllZCBpbiB0aGUgRVJPIGNvdWxkIGJlIGxvb3NlIG9yIHN0 cmljdC4gVGhlbiB0aGUgUENDIChlLmcuIAogICBOTVMsIGluZ3Jlc3Mgbm9kZSkgY2FuIHRyaWdn ZXIgdGhlIHNldHVwIG9mIHRoZSBMU1BzIGFjY29yZGluZyB0byB0aGUgCiAgIGNvbXB1dGVkIHBh dGguIAoKIAogCkUuIE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSAxMV0gCgwKZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0 LTA1LnR4dCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEp1bmUgMjAxMSAKICAgIAoKICAgSW4gdGhl IGNhc2Ugb2YgdW5zdWNjZXNzZnVsIHBhdGggY29tcHV0YXRpb24sIHRoZSBQQ1JlcCBtZXNzYWdl IGFsc28gCiAgIGNvbnRhaW5zIGEgTk8tUEFUSCBvYmplY3QsIGFuZCB0aGUgU1dJVENILVRZUEUg b2JqZWN0IGFuZC9vciB0aGUgUkVRLQogICBBREFQLUNBUCBNQVkgYmUgdXNlZCB0byBpbmRpY2F0 ZSB0aGUgc2V0IG9mIGNvbnN0cmFpbnRzIHRoYXQgY291bGQgCiAgIG5vdCBiZSBzYXRpc2ZpZWQu IAoKNS4gVXBkYXRlZCBGb3JtYXQgb2YgUENFUCBNZXNzYWdlcyAKCiAgIE1lc3NhZ2UgZm9ybWF0 cyBpbiB0aGlzIHNlY3Rpb24sIGFzIHRob3NlIGluIFtSRkM1NDQwXSBhcmUgcHJlc2VudGVkIAog ICB1c2luZyBCYWNrdXMtTmF1ciBGb3JtYXQgYXMgc3BlY2lmaWVkIGluIFtSRkM1NTExXS4gCgog ICBUaGUgZm9ybWF0IG9mIHRoZSBQQ1JlcSBtZXNzYWdlIGlzIHVwZGF0ZWQgYXMgZm9sbG93czog CgogICA8UENSZXEgTWVzc2FnZT46Oj0gPENvbW1vbiBIZWFkZXI+IAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgWzxTVkVDLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxyZXF1ZXN0LWxpc3Q+ IAogICAgCiAgICAgIHdoZXJlOiAKICAgICAgICAgPHN2ZWMtbGlzdD46Oj08U1ZFQz4gCiAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxzdmVjLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgIAogICAgICAgICA8cmVxdWVzdC1s aXN0Pjo6PTxyZXF1ZXN0Pls8cmVxdWVzdC1saXN0Pl0gCiAgICAKICAgICAgICAgPHJlcXVlc3Q+ Ojo9IDxSUD4gCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8RU5ELVBPSU5UUz4gCiAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICBbPG9mLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFs8TFNQQT5dIAog ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxCQU5EV0lEVEg+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IFs8bWV0cmljLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFs8UlJPPls8QkFORFdJRFRI Pl1dIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxJUk8+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IFs8TE9BRC1CQUxBTkNJTkc+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFs8SU5URVItTEFZRVI+ IFs8U1dJVENILUxBWUVSPl1dIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxSRVEtQURBUC1DQVA+ XSAKICAgICAgd2hlcmU6IAogICAgCiAgICAgIDxvZi1saXN0Pjo6PTxPRj5bPG9mLWxpc3Q+XSAK ICAgICAgPG1ldHJpYy1saXN0Pjo6PTxNRVRSSUM+WzxtZXRyaWMtbGlzdD5dIAogICAgCiAgIFRo ZSBmb3JtYXQgb2YgdGhlIFBDUmVwIG1lc3NhZ2UgaXMgdXBkYXRlZCBhcyBmb2xsb3dzOiAKICAg PFBDUmVwIE1lc3NhZ2U+IDo6PSA8Q29tbW9uIEhlYWRlcj4gCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgPHJlc3BvbnNlLWxpc3Q+IAogICAgCgogCiAKRS4gT2tpICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhw aXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAyMDExICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDEyXSAKDApkcmFmdC1pZXRm LXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXllci1leHQtMDUudHh0ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSnVuZSAy MDExIAogICAgCgogICAgICB3aGVyZTogCiAgICAgICAgIDxyZXNwb25zZS1saXN0Pjo6PTxyZXNw b25zZT5bPHJlc3BvbnNlLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgIAogICAgICAgICA8cmVzcG9uc2U+Ojo9PFJQPiAK ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxOTy1QQVRIPl0gCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFs8 YXR0cmlidXRlLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxwYXRoLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAg IAogICAgICAgICA8cGF0aC1saXN0Pjo6PTxwYXRoPls8cGF0aC1saXN0Pl0gCiAgICAKICAgICAg ICAgPHBhdGg+Ojo9IDxFUk8+PGF0dHJpYnV0ZS1saXN0PiAKICAgIAogICAgICB3aGVyZTogCiAg ICAgICAgIDxhdHRyaWJ1dGUtbGlzdD46Oj1bPG9mLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIFs8TFNQQT5dIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxCQU5EV0lE VEg+XSAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFs8bWV0cmljLWxpc3Q+XSAKICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFs8SVJPPl0gCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICBbPElOVEVSLUxBWUVSPl0gCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbPFNXSVRDSC1M QVlFUj5dIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgWzxSRVEtQURBUC1DQVA+XSAKICAg ICAgICAgPG9mLWxpc3Q+Ojo9PE9GPls8b2YtbGlzdD5dIAogICAgICAgICA8bWV0cmljLWxpc3Q+ Ojo9PE1FVFJJQz5bPG1ldHJpYy1saXN0Pl0gCiAgICAKCjYuIE1hbmFnZWFiaWxpdHkgQ29uc2lk ZXJhdGlvbnMgCgogICBUQkQgCgogICBNYW5hZ2VhYmlsaXR5IG9mIGludGVyLWxheWVyIHRyYWZm aWMgZW5naW5lZXJpbmcgd2l0aCBQQ0UgbXVzdCAKICAgYWRkcmVzcyB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGNv bnNpZGVyYXRpb24gZm9yIHNlY3Rpb24gNS4xLiAKCiAgIC0gbmVlZCBmb3IgYSBNSUIgbW9kdWxl IGZvciBjb250cm9sIGFuZCBtb25pdG9yaW5nIAogICAtIG5lZWQgZm9yIGJ1aWx0LWluIGRpYWdu b3N0aWMgdG9vbHMgCiAgIC0gY29uZmlndXJhdGlvbiBpbXBsaWNhdGlvbiBmb3IgdGhlIHByb3Rv Y29sIAogICAgCjcuIElBTkEgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMgCgo3LjEuIE5ldyBQQ0VQIE9iamVjdHMg CgogICBUaHJlZSBuZXcgb2JqZWN0czogdGhlIElOVEVSLUxBWUVSIG9iamVjdCwgdGhlIFNXSVRD SC1MQVlFUiBvYmplY3QsIAogICBhbmQgdGhlIFJFUS1BREFQLUNBUCBvYmplY3QuIAoKIAogCkUu IE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICBbUGFnZSAxM10gCgwKZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0LTA1LnR4dCAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEp1bmUgMjAxMSAKICAgIAoKICAgSU5URVItTEFZRVIgT2JqZWN0 LUNsYXNzIGlzIHRvIGJlIGFzc2lnbmVkIGJ5IElBTkEgKHJlY29tbWVuZGVkIAogICB2YWx1ZT0x OCkgCgogICBJTlRFUi1MQVlFUiBPYmplY3QtVHlwZSBpcyB0byBiZSBhc3NpZ25lZCBieSBJQU5B IChyZWNvbW1lbmRlZCAKICAgdmFsdWU9MSkgCgogICBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgT2JqZWN0LUNsYXNz IGlzIHRvIGJlIGFzc2lnbmVkIGJ5IElBTkEgKHJlY29tbWVuZGVkIAogICB2YWx1ZT0xOSkgCgog ICBTV0lUQ0gtTEFZRVIgT2JqZWN0LVR5cGUgaXMgdG8gYmUgYXNzaWduZWQgYnkgSUFOQSAocmVj b21tZW5kZWQgCiAgIHZhbHVlPTEpIAoKICAgUkVRLUFEQVAtQ0FQIE9iamVjdC1DbGFzcyBpcyB0 byBiZSBhc3NpZ25lZCBieSBJQU5BIChyZWNvbW1lbmRlZCAKICAgdmFsdWU9MjApIAoKICAgUkVR LUFEQVAtQ0FQIE9iamVjdC1UeXBlIGlzIHRvIGJlIGFzc2lnbmVkIGJ5IElBTkEgKHJlY29tbWVu ZGVkIAogICB2YWx1ZT0xKSAKCjcuMi4gTmV3IFJlZ2lzdHJ5IGZvciBJTlRFUi1MQVlFUiBPYmpl Y3QgRmxhZ3MgCgogICBJQU5BIGlzIHJlcXVlc3RlZCB0byBjcmVhdGUgYSByZWdpc3RyeSB0byBt YW5hZ2UgdGhlIEZsYWcgZmllbGQgb2YgCiAgIHRoZSBJTlRFUi1MYXllciBvYmplY3QuIAoKICAg TmV3IGJpdCBudW1iZXJzIG1heSBiZSBhbGxvY2F0ZWQgb25seSBieSBhbiBJRVRGIENvbnNlbnN1 cyBhY3Rpb24uIAogICBFYWNoIGJpdCBzaG91bGQgYmUgdHJhY2tlZCB3aXRoIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dp bmcgcXVhbGl0aWVzOiAKCiAgIG8gIEJpdCBudW1iZXIgKGNvdW50aW5nIGZyb20gYml0IDAgYXMg dGhlIG1vc3Qgc2lnbmlmaWNhbnQgYml0KSAKCiAgIG8gIENhcGFiaWxpdHkgRGVzY3JpcHRpb24g CgogICBvICBEZWZpbmluZyBSRkMgCgogICBTZXZlcmFsIGJpdHMgYXJlIGRlZmluZWQgZm9yIHRo ZSBJTlRFUi1MQVlFUiBvYmplY3QgZmxhZyBmaWVsZHMgaW4gCiAgIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuIFRo ZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdmFsdWVzIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBhc3NpZ25lZDogCgogICBCaXQgTnVtYmVyICAg RGVzY3JpcHRpb24gICBSZWZlcmVuY2UgCgogICAgMjkgICAgICAgICAgICBUIGZsYWcgICAgICAg IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgCiAgICAzMCAgICAgICAgICAgIE0gZmxhZyAgICAgICAgdGhpcyBkb2N1 bWVudCAKICAgIDMxICAgICAgICAgICAgSSBmbGFnICAgICAgICB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IAogICAg CjcuMy4gTUVUUklDIFR5cGUgCgogICBUd28gbmV3IG1ldHJpYyB0eXBlcyBhcmUgZGVmaW5lZCBp biB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGZvciB0aGUgTUVUUklDIAogICBvYmplY3QgKHNwZWNpZmllZCBpbiBb UkZDNTQ0MF0pLiBUaGUgSUFOQSBpcyByZXF1ZXN0ZWQgdG8gbWFrZSB0aGUgCiAgIGZvbGxvd2lu ZyBhbGxvY2F0aW9uIChzdWdnZXN0ZWQgdmFsdWUpOiAKIAogCkUuIE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSAxNF0gCgwKZHJh ZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0LTA1LnR4dCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IEp1bmUgMjAxMSAKICAgIAoKICAgLSBUeXBlIDExIDogTnVtYmVyIG9mIGFkYXB0YXRpb25zIG9u IGEgcGF0aCAgCgogICAtIFR5cGUgMTIgOiBOdW1iZXIgb2YgbGF5ZXJzIG9uIGEgcGF0aCAgCgo4 LiBTZWN1cml0eSBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyAKCiAgIFRCRCAKCiAgIEludGVyLWxheWVyIHRyYWZm aWMgZW5naW5lZXJpbmcgd2l0aCBQQ0UgbWF5IHJhaXNlIG5ldyBzZWN1cml0eSAKICAgaXNzdWVz IHdoZW4gUENFLVBDRSBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIGlzIGRvbmUgYmV0d2VlbiBkaWZmZXJlbnQgbGF5 ZXIgCiAgIG5ldHdvcmtzIGZvciBpbnRlci1sYXllciBwYXRoIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uLiBTZWN1cml0 eSBpc3N1ZXMgbWF5IGFsc28gCiAgIGV4aXN0IHdoZW4gYSBzaW5nbGUgUENFIGlzIGdyYW50ZWQg ZnVsbCB2aXNpYmlsaXR5IG9mIFRFIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIAogICB0aGF0IGFwcGxpZXMgdG8gbXVs dGlwbGUgbGF5ZXJzLiAgCgogICBJdCBpcyBleHBlY3RlZCB0aGF0IHNvbHV0aW9ucyBmb3IgaW50 ZXItbGF5ZXIgcHJvdG9jb2wgZXh0ZW5zaW9ucyAKICAgd2lsbCBhZGRyZXNzIHRoZXNlIGlzc3Vl cyBpbiBkZXRhaWwgdXNpbmcgc2VjdXJpdHkgdGVjaG5pcXVlcyBzdWNoIGFzIAogICBhdXRoZW50 aWNhdGlvbi4gCgo5LiBBY2tub3dsZWRnbWVudHMgCgogICAgCgoxMC4gUmVmZXJlbmNlcyAKCjEw LjEuIE5vcm1hdGl2ZSBSZWZlcmVuY2VzIAoKICAgW1JGQzIxMTldIFMuIEJyYWRuZXIsICJLZXkg d29yZHMgZm9yIHVzZSBpbiBSRkNzIHRvIGluZGljYXRlIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgcmVxdWlyZW1l bnRzIGxldmVscyIsIFJGQyAyMTE5LCBNYXJjaCAxOTk3LiAgCgogICBbUkZDMzQ3MV0gTC4gQnVy Z2VyLCAiR2VuZXJhbGl6ZWQgTXVsdGktUHJvdG9jb2wgTGFiZWwgU3dpdGNoaW5nIAogICAgICAg ICAgICAgKEdNUExTKSIsIFJGQyAzNDcxLCBKYW51YXJ5IDIwMDMuIAoKICAgW1JGQzM5NDVdIEUu IE1hbm5pZSwgIkdlbmVyYWxpemVkIE11bHRpLVByb3RvY29sIExhYmVsIFN3aXRjaGluZyAKICAg ICAgICAgICAgIEFyY2hpdGVjdHVyZSIsIFJGQyAzOTQ1LCBPY3RvYmVyIDIwMDQuIAoKICAgW1JG QzQyMDNdIEsuIEtvbXBlbGxhIGFuZCBZLiBSZWtodGVyLCAiT1NQRiBFeHRlbnNpb25zIGluIFN1 cHBvcnQgb2YgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICBHZW5lcmFsaXplZCBNdWx0aS1Qcm90b2NvbCBMYWJlbCBT d2l0Y2hpbmcgKEdNUExTKSIsIFJGQyAKICAgICAgICAgICAgIDQyMDMsIE9jdG9iZXIgMjAwNS4g CgogICBbUkZDNDIwNl0gSy4gS29tcGVsbGEsIGFuZCBZLiBSZWtodGVyLCAiTGFiZWwgU3dpdGNo ZWQgUGF0aHMgKExTUCkgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICBIaWVyYXJjaHkgd2l0aCBHZW5lcmFsaXplZCBN dWx0aS1Qcm90b2NvbCBMYWJlbCBTd2l0Y2hpbmcgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAoR01QTFMpIFRyYWZm aWMgRW5naW5lZXJpbmcgKFRFKSIsIFJGQyA0MjA2LCBPY3RvYmVyIDIwMDUuIAoKICAgW1JGQzU0 NDBdIEpQLiBWYXNzZXVyIGV0IGFsLCAiUGF0aCBDb21wdXRhdGlvbiBFbGVtZW50IChQQ0UpIAog ICAgICAgICAgICAgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBQcm90b2NvbCAoUENFUCkiIFJGQyA1NDQwLCBNYXJj aCAyMDA5LiAKCgogCiAKRS4gT2tpICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAy MDExICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDE1XSAKDApkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXll ci1leHQtMDUudHh0ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgSnVuZSAyMDExIAogICAgCgogICBb UENFLUlOVEVSLUxBWUVSLVJFUV0gRS4gT2tpIGV0IGFsLiwgIlBDQy1QQ0UgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlv biAKICAgICAgICAgICAgIFJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBmb3IgSW50ZXItTGF5ZXIgVHJhZmZpYyBFbmdp bmVlcmluZyIsIGRyYWZ0LQogICAgICAgICAgICAgaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItcmVxLCB3 b3JrIGluIHByb2dyZXNzLiAKCiAgIFtSRkM1NjIzXSBFLiBPa2kgZXQgYWwuLCAiRnJhbWV3b3Jr IGZvciBQQ0UtQmFzZWQgSW50ZXItTGF5ZXIgTVBMUyAKICAgICAgICAgICAgIGFuZCBHTVBMUyBU cmFmZmljIEVuZ2luZWVyaW5nIiwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDIwMDkuIAoKKiAgW1JGQzUzMzldICBKTC4g TGUgUm91eCBldCBhbCwgIkV2YWx1YXRpb24gb2YgRXhpc3RpbmcgR01QTFMgUHJvdG9jb2xzIAog ICAgICAgICAgICAgYWdhaW5zdCBNdWx0aS1MYXllciBhbmQgTXVsdGktUmVnaW9uIE5ldHdvcmtz IChNTE4vTVJOKSIsIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgUkZDNTMzOSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDIwMDguICAKCiog LS0+ICBSRkM2MDAxCiAgIFtSRkM2MDAxXSBELiBQYXBhZGltaXRyaW91IGV0IGFsLiwgIiBHZW5l cmFsaXplZCBNdWx0aS1Qcm90b2NvbCBMYWJlbCAKICAgICAgICAgICAgIFN3aXRjaGluZyAoR01Q TFMpIFByb3RvY29sIEV4dGVuc2lvbnMgZm9yIE11bHRpLUxheWVyIGFuZCAKICAgICAgICAgICAg IE11bHRpLVJlZ2lvbiBOZXR3b3JrcyAoTUxOL01STikiLCBSRkM2MDAxLCBPY3RvYmVyIDIwMTAu IAoKCjEwLjIuIEluZm9ybWF0aXZlIFJlZmVyZW5jZXMgCgogICBbUkZDNDY1NV0gQS4gRmFycmVs LCBKUC4gVmFzc2V1ciBhbmQgSi4gQXNoLCAiQSBQYXRoIENvbXB1dGF0aW9uIAogICAgICAgICAg ICAgRWxlbWVudCAoUENFKS1CYXNlZCBBcmNoaXRlY3R1cmUiLCBSRkMgNDY1NSwgU2VwdGVtYmVy IDIwMDYuIAoKICAgW1JGQzUyMTJdIEsuIFNoaW9tb3RvIGV0IGFsLiwgIlJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBm b3IgR01QTFMtYmFzZWQgbXVsdGktCiAgICAgICAgICAgICByZWdpb24gYW5kIG11bHRpLWxheWVy IG5ldHdvcmtzIChNUk4vTUxOKSIsIFJGQyA1MjEyLCBKdWx5IAogICAgICAgICAgICAgMjAwOC4g CgogICBbUkZDNTE1MF0gQS4gQXl5YW5nYXIgZXQgYWwuLCAiTGFiZWwgU3dpdGNoZWQgUGF0aCBT dGl0Y2hpbmcgd2l0aCAKICAgICAgICAgICAgIEdlbmVyYWxpemVkIE11bHRpcHJvdG9jb2wgTGFi ZWwgU3dpdGNoaW5nIFRyYWZmaWMgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICBFbmdpbmVlcmluZyAoR01QTFMgVEUp IiwgUkZDIDUxNTAsIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDIwMDguIAoKICAgW1JGQzU1MTFdIEZhcnJlbCwgQS4sICJS ZWR1Y2VkIEJhY2t1cy1OYXVyIEZvcm0gKFJCTkYpIEEgU3ludGF4IFVzZWQgCiAgICAgICAgICAg ICBpbiBWYXJpb3VzIFByb3RvY29sIFNwZWNpZmljYXRpb25zIiwgQXByaWwgMjAwOS4gCgogCgox MS4gQXV0aG9ycycgQWRkcmVzc2VzIAoKICAgRWlqaSBPa2kKICAgVW5pdmVyc2l0eSBvZiBFbGVj dHJvLUNvbW11bmljYXRpb25zCiAgIFRva3lvCiAgIEphcGFuCiAgIEVtYWlsOiBva2lAaWNlLnVl Yy5hYy5qcAoKCiAgIFRvbW9ub3JpIFRha2VkYQogICBOVFQKCgoKRS4gT2tpICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAyMDExICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDE2XSAKDApk cmFmdC1pZXRmLXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXllci1leHQtMDUudHh0ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgSnVuZSAyMDExIAoKCiAgIDMtOS0xMSBNaWRvcmktY2hvLAogICBNdXNhc2hpbm8tc2hpLCBU b2t5byAxODAtODU4NSwgSmFwYW4KICAgRW1haWw6IHRha2VkYS50b21vbm9yaUBsYWIubnR0LmNv LmpwCgoKICAgSmVhbi1Mb3VpcyBMZSBSb3V4CiAgIEZyYW5jZSBUZWxlY29tIFImRCwKICAgQXYg UGllcnJlIE1hcnppbiwKICAgMjIzMDAgTGFubmlvbiwgRnJhbmNlCiAgIEVtYWlsOiBqZWFubG91 aXMubGVyb3V4QG9yYW5nZS1mdGdyb3VwLmNvbQoKCiAgIEFkcmlhbiBGYXJyZWwKICAgT2xkIERv ZyBDb25zdWx0aW5nCiAgIEVtYWlsOiBhZHJpYW5Ab2xkZG9nLmNvLnVrCgogICBGYXRhaSBaaGFu ZwogICBIdWF3ZWkgVGVjaG5vbG9naWVzIENvLiwgTHRkLgogICBGMy01LUIgUiZEIENlbnRlciwg SHVhd2VpIEJhc2UsCiAgIEJhbnRpYW4sIExvbmdnYW5nIERpc3RyaWN0CiAgIFNoZW56aGVuIDUx ODEyOSBQLlIuQ2hpbmEKICAgUGhvbmU6ICs4Ni03NTUtMjg5NzI5MTIKICAgRW1haWw6IHpoYW5n ZmF0YWlAaHVhd2VpLmNvbQoKCkludGVsbGVjdHVhbCBQcm9wZXJ0eSAKICAgIAoKICAgVGhlIElF VEYgVHJ1c3QgdGFrZXMgbm8gcG9zaXRpb24gcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSB2YWxpZGl0eSBvciBzY29w ZSBvZiAgIAogICBhbnkgSW50ZWxsZWN0dWFsIFByb3BlcnR5IFJpZ2h0cyBvciBvdGhlciByaWdo dHMgdGhhdCBtaWdodCBiZSAgIAogICBjbGFpbWVkIHRvIHBlcnRhaW4gdG8gdGhlIGltcGxlbWVu dGF0aW9uIG9yIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgdGVjaG5vbG9neSAgIAogICBkZXNjcmliZWQgaW4gYW55IElF VEYgRG9jdW1lbnQgb3IgdGhlIGV4dGVudCB0byB3aGljaCBhbnkgbGljZW5zZSAgIAogICB1bmRl ciBzdWNoIHJpZ2h0cyBtaWdodCBvciBtaWdodCBub3QgYmUgYXZhaWxhYmxlOyBub3IgZG9lcyBp dCAgIAogICByZXByZXNlbnQgdGhhdCBpdCBoYXMgbWFkZSBhbnkgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgZWZmb3J0 IHRvIGlkZW50aWZ5IGFueSAgIAogICBzdWNoIHJpZ2h0cy4gCgogICBDb3BpZXMgb2YgSW50ZWxs ZWN0dWFsIFByb3BlcnR5IGRpc2Nsb3N1cmVzIG1hZGUgdG8gdGhlIElFVEYgICAKICAgU2VjcmV0 YXJpYXQgYW5kIGFueSBhc3N1cmFuY2VzIG9mIGxpY2Vuc2VzIHRvIGJlIG1hZGUgYXZhaWxhYmxl LCBvciAgIAogICB0aGUgcmVzdWx0IG9mIGFuIGF0dGVtcHQgbWFkZSB0byBvYnRhaW4gYSBnZW5l cmFsIGxpY2Vuc2Ugb3IgICAKICAgcGVybWlzc2lvbiBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBzdWNoIHByb3By aWV0YXJ5IHJpZ2h0cyBieSBpbXBsZW1lbnRlcnMgb3IgICAKICAgdXNlcnMgb2YgdGhpcyBzcGVj aWZpY2F0aW9uIGNhbiBiZSBvYnRhaW5lZCBmcm9tIHRoZSBJRVRGIG9uLWxpbmUgSVBSICAgCiAg IHJlcG9zaXRvcnkgYXQgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pcHIgCgogCiAKRS4gT2tpICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBEZWNlbWJlciAyMDExICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDE3 XSAKDApkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXBjZS1pbnRlci1sYXllci1leHQtMDUudHh0ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgSnVuZSAyMDExIAogICAgCgogICBUaGUgSUVURiBpbnZpdGVzIGFueSBpbnRlcmVz dGVkIHBhcnR5IHRvIGJyaW5nIHRvIGl0cyBhdHRlbnRpb24gYW55ICAgCiAgIGNvcHlyaWdodHMs IHBhdGVudHMgb3IgcGF0ZW50IGFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucywgb3Igb3RoZXIgcHJvcHJpZXRhcnkgICAK ICAgcmlnaHRzIHRoYXQgbWF5IGNvdmVyIHRlY2hub2xvZ3kgdGhhdCBtYXkgYmUgcmVxdWlyZWQg dG8gaW1wbGVtZW50ICAgCiAgIGFueSBzdGFuZGFyZCBvciBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9uIGNvbnRhaW5l ZCBpbiBhbiBJRVRGIERvY3VtZW50LiBQbGVhc2UgICAKICAgYWRkcmVzcyB0aGUgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gdG8gdGhlIElFVEYgYXQgaWV0Zi1pcHJAaWV0Zi5vcmcuIAoKICAgVGhlIGRlZmluaXRpdmUg dmVyc2lvbiBvZiBhbiBJRVRGIERvY3VtZW50IGlzIHRoYXQgcHVibGlzaGVkIGJ5LCBvciAgIAog ICB1bmRlciB0aGUgYXVzcGljZXMgb2YsIHRoZSBJRVRGLiBWZXJzaW9ucyBvZiBJRVRGIERvY3Vt ZW50cyB0aGF0IGFyZSAgIAogICBwdWJsaXNoZWQgYnkgdGhpcmQgcGFydGllcywgaW5jbHVkaW5n IHRob3NlIHRoYXQgYXJlIHRyYW5zbGF0ZWQgaW50byAgIAogICBvdGhlciBsYW5ndWFnZXMsIHNo b3VsZCBub3QgYmUgY29uc2lkZXJlZCB0byBiZSBkZWZpbml0aXZlIHZlcnNpb25zICAgCiAgIG9m IElFVEYgRG9jdW1lbnRzLiBUaGUgZGVmaW5pdGl2ZSB2ZXJzaW9uIG9mIHRoZXNlIExlZ2FsIFBy b3Zpc2lvbnMgICAKICAgaXMgdGhhdCBwdWJsaXNoZWQgYnksIG9yIHVuZGVyIHRoZSBhdXNwaWNl cyBvZiwgdGhlIElFVEYuIFZlcnNpb25zIG9mICAgCiAgIHRoZXNlIExlZ2FsIFByb3Zpc2lvbnMg dGhhdCBhcmUgcHVibGlzaGVkIGJ5IHRoaXJkIHBhcnRpZXMsIGluY2x1ZGluZyAgIAogICB0aG9z ZSB0aGF0IGFyZSB0cmFuc2xhdGVkIGludG8gb3RoZXIgbGFuZ3VhZ2VzLCBzaG91bGQgbm90IGJl ICAgCiAgIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgdG8gYmUgZGVmaW5pdGl2ZSB2ZXJzaW9ucyBvZiB0aGVzZSBMZWdh bCBQcm92aXNpb25zLiAKCiAgIEZvciB0aGUgYXZvaWRhbmNlIG9mIGRvdWJ0LCBlYWNoIENvbnRy aWJ1dG9yIHRvIHRoZSBJRVRGIFN0YW5kYXJkcyAgIAogICBQcm9jZXNzIGxpY2Vuc2VzIGVhY2gg Q29udHJpYnV0aW9uIHRoYXQgaGUgb3Igc2hlIG1ha2VzIGFzIHBhcnQgb2YgICAKICAgdGhlIElF VEYgU3RhbmRhcmRzIFByb2Nlc3MgdG8gdGhlIElFVEYgVHJ1c3QgcHVyc3VhbnQgdG8gdGhlICAg CiAgIHByb3Zpc2lvbnMgb2YgUkZDIDUzNzguIE5vIGxhbmd1YWdlIHRvIHRoZSBjb250cmFyeSwg b3IgdGVybXMsICAgCiAgIGNvbmRpdGlvbnMgb3IgcmlnaHRzIHRoYXQgZGlmZmVyIGZyb20gb3Ig YXJlIGluY29uc2lzdGVudCB3aXRoIHRoZSAgIAogICByaWdodHMgYW5kIGxpY2Vuc2VzIGdyYW50 ZWQgdW5kZXIgUkZDIDUzNzgsIHNoYWxsIGhhdmUgYW55IGVmZmVjdCBhbmQgICAKICAgc2hhbGwg YmUgbnVsbCBhbmQgdm9pZCwgd2hldGhlciBwdWJsaXNoZWQgb3IgcG9zdGVkIGJ5IHN1Y2ggICAK ICAgQ29udHJpYnV0b3IsIG9yIGluY2x1ZGVkIHdpdGggb3IgaW4gc3VjaCBDb250cmlidXRpb24u IAoKRGlzY2xhaW1lciBvZiBWYWxpZGl0eSAKIAogICBBbGwgSUVURiBEb2N1bWVudHMgYW5kIHRo ZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250YWluZWQgdGhlcmVpbiBhcmUgcHJvdmlkZWQgICAKICAgb24gYW4g IkFTIElTIiBiYXNpcyBhbmQgVEhFIENPTlRSSUJVVE9SLCBUSEUgT1JHQU5JWkFUSU9OIEhFL1NI RSAgIAogICBSRVBSRVNFTlRTIE9SIElTIFNQT05TT1JFRCBCWSAoSUYgQU5ZKSwgVEhFIElOVEVS TkVUIFNPQ0lFVFksIFRIRSAgIAogICBJRVRGIFRSVVNUIEFORCBUSEUgSU5URVJORVQgRU5HSU5F RVJJTkcgVEFTSyBGT1JDRSBESVNDTEFJTSBBTEwgICAKICAgV0FSUkFOVElFUywgRVhQUkVTUyBP UiBJTVBMSUVELCBJTkNMVURJTkcgQlVUIE5PVCBMSU1JVEVEIFRPIEFOWSAgIAogICBXQVJSQU5U WSBUSEFUIFRIRSBVU0UgT0YgVEhFIElORk9STUFUSU9OIFRIRVJFSU4gV0lMTCBOT1QgSU5GUklO R0UgICAKICAgQU5ZIFJJR0hUUyBPUiBBTlkgSU1QTElFRCBXQVJSQU5USUVTIE9GIE1FUkNIQU5U QUJJTElUWSBPUiBGSVRORVNTICAgCiAgIEZPUiBBIFBBUlRJQ1VMQVIgUFVSUE9TRS4gCgogCkZ1 bGwgQ29weXJpZ2h0IFN0YXRlbWVudCAKIAogICBDb3B5cmlnaHQgKGMpIDIwMTAgSUVURiBUcnVz dCBhbmQgdGhlIHBlcnNvbnMgaWRlbnRpZmllZCBhcyB0aGUgICAKICAgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9y cy4gIEFsbCByaWdodHMgcmVzZXJ2ZWQuIAoKICAgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyBzdWJqZWN0IHRv IEJDUCA3OCBhbmQgdGhlIElFVEYgVHJ1c3QncyBMZWdhbCAKICAgUHJvdmlzaW9ucyBSZWxhdGlu ZyB0byBJRVRGIERvY3VtZW50cyAKICAgKGh0dHA6Ly90cnVzdGVlLmlldGYub3JnL2xpY2Vuc2Ut aW5mbykgaW4gZWZmZWN0IG9uIHRoZSBkYXRlIG9mIAogICBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIGRv Y3VtZW50LiBQbGVhc2UgcmV2aWV3IHRoZXNlIGRvY3VtZW50cyBjYXJlZnVsbHksIAoKIAogCkUu IE9raSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRGVjZW1iZXIgMjAxMSAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICBbUGFnZSAxOF0gCgwKZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wY2UtaW50ZXItbGF5ZXItZXh0LTA1LnR4dCAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEp1bmUgMjAxMSAKICAgIAoKICAgYXMgdGhleSBkZXNjcmliZSB5 b3VyIHJpZ2h0cyBhbmQgcmVzdHJpY3Rpb25zIHdpdGggcmVzcGVjdCB0byB0aGlzIAogICBkb2N1 bWVudC4gIENvZGUgQ29tcG9uZW50cyBleHRyYWN0ZWQgZnJvbSB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IG11c3Qg aW5jbHVkZSAKICAgU2ltcGxpZmllZCBCU0QgTGljZW5zZSB0ZXh0IGFzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbiBT ZWN0aW9uIDQuZSBvZiB0aGUgVHJ1c3QgCiAgIExlZ2FsIFByb3Zpc2lvbnMgYW5kIGFyZSBwcm92 aWRlZCB3aXRob3V0IHdhcnJhbnR5IGFzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbiAKICAgdGhlIFNpbXBsaWZpZWQg QlNEIExpY2Vuc2UuIAoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCiAK IApFLiBPa2kgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVzIERlY2VtYmVyIDIwMTEgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgW1BhZ2UgMTldIAoMCg== ------_=_NextPart_001_01CC7EA0.606F70FB-- From helia.pouyllau@alcatel-lucent.com Thu Sep 29 08:04:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9F721F8CE8 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:04:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UrrCaY36JVeJ for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail3.alcatel.fr (smail3.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ACE621F8C85 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.64]) by smail3.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p8TF4pV5015995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:07:20 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSA1.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.34]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.64]) with mapi; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:06:53 +0200 From: "POUYLLAU, HELIA (HELIA)" To: "pce@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:06:51 +0200 Thread-Topic: Errors and Notifications Thread-Index: Acx+uWsLZkmqhtonTZOkZQPKloUakw== Message-ID: <2D26984ED849C94A8C7D6276DA008FF212A9480F6F@FRMRSSXCHMBSA1.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2D26984ED849C94A8C7D6276DA008FF212A9480F6FFRMRSSXCHMBSA_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.83 Subject: [Pce] Errors and Notifications X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:04:32 -0000 --_000_2D26984ED849C94A8C7D6276DA008FF212A9480F6FFRMRSSXCHMBSA_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear PCErs, We have just (finally :-) ) submitted the -03 version of draft-pouyllau-pce= -enhanced-errors: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-pouyllau-pce-enhanced-errors= -03.txt We modified many sections according to mailing-list comments and feedback r= eceived at last year meeting. Main modifications are: - section 4: Error-type and Notification-type are replaced by TLVs : a TLV= to indicate the criticity level of errors, a TLV to indicate the type of n= otification (request-specific or not), a TLV to specify if the message must= be propagate or not. The propagation of critical errors that consequently = close the PCEP session is still feasible (we aim to cover all the behaviors= ) but optional by the introduction of a medium level of criticity. - section 5.3: specify the rules of TLV usages with the error and notificat= ion types defined in RFC 5440, 5441, 5455, 5521, 5557, 5886 and 6006. - section 6: Error and notification scenarios have been reformulated and fo= cus on a sub-set of behaviors. Please provide comments and feedback BR Helia --_000_2D26984ED849C94A8C7D6276DA008FF212A9480F6FFRMRSSXCHMBSA_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear PCEr= s,

&nbs= p;

We have j= ust (finally :-) ) submitted the -03 version of draft-pouyllau-pce-enhanced-errors: http= ://www.ietf.org/id/draft-pouyllau-pce-enhanced-errors-03.txt

&nbs= p;

We modifi= ed many sections according to mailing-list comments and feedback received at last y= ear meeting. Main modifications are:

- section= 4: Error-type and Notification-type are replaced by TLVs : a  TLV to indi= cate the criticity level of errors, a TLV to indicate the type of notification (request-specific or not), a TLV to specify if the message must be propagat= e or not. The propagation of critical errors that consequently close the PCEP session is still feasible (we aim to cover all the behaviors) but optional = by the introduction of a medium level of criticity.

- section= 5.3: specify the rules of TLV usages with the error and notification types defin= ed in RFC 5440, 5441, 5455, 5521, 5557, 5886 and 6006.

- section= 6: Error and notification scenarios have been reformulated and focus on a sub-= set of behaviors.

 

Please provide comments and feedback<= /span>

 

BR

Helia

--_000_2D26984ED849C94A8C7D6276DA008FF212A9480F6FFRMRSSXCHMBSA_--