Re: Review of draft-ietf-pce-monitoring-04.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On 2009-12-15, at 17:50, JP Vasseur wrote:
>> First it wasn't clear from the document if "congestion" was
>> referring to the PCE itself or the corresponding LSPs.  For clarity
>> of discussion, I will assume LSP congestion.  Even if that is not
>> correct, my comments are general and there are equivalent problems
>> for PCE case.
>> 
> 
> This is, in fact, the wrong assumption. The congestion metric refers
> to the congestion of the PCE itself.
> 
> We will add a clarification of this point to the top of section 4.4 as
> follows:
> 
> Note that "congestion" as indicated by this object refers to the
> processing state of the PCE and its ability to handle new PCEP
> requests.

didn't we change the terminology form "congestion" to "overload" in earlier documents, to address this potential for confusion?

Lars

<<attachment: smime.p7s>>

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]