1. 64th IETF Vancouver November 2005 Choosing a PCC-PCE Protocol

2. 64th IETF Vancouver November 2005 Due Diligence We need a PCC-PCE protocol –Requirements in draft-ietf-pce-comm-protocol-gen- reqs-02.txt –Covers PCC-PCE and PCE-PCE communications Don’t re-invent any wheels, but don’t use a sledgehammer –Maybe use existing protocols –Maybe use elements of existing protocols –Maybe learn lessons from existing protocols Chairs are falling over backwards to “be fair” –Need to be impartial –Now need to draw a line and make a decision

3. 64th IETF Vancouver November 2005 “We Don’t Have Kings” The IETF does not bless one protocol to the exclusion of others, but… Multiple protocols for the same purpose are: –Confusing for the industry –Wasteful of development effort –Likely to raise costs –Unhelpful for interoperability The working group should focus on a single protocol Others are free to experiment with other protocols and report back

4. 64th IETF Vancouver November 2005 Options for Choosing 1.In-depth analysis of all potential protocols –Hugely time-consuming –“Unlimited” set of potential protocols –No-one willing to do the work 2.Overview analysis of a few key potential solutions –Would also hold up progression of development work –Also no volunteers 3.Select a protocol based on: –Support for the documentation process –Willingness to implement –Meeting the requirements Suggestion: –Follow option 3 –Perform options 1 or 2 in the background if anyone is so motivated

5. 64th IETF Vancouver November 2005 What is “enough” Required –Must satisfy the documented requirements –Must have willing implementers –Must have SPs interested in the technology Desired –Should have SPs willing to deploy –Should use existing building blocks (e.g. transport) –Should learn lessons from other protocols (e.g. policy) –Should not contain unnecessary protocol state or overhead Unnecessary –Do not need to “prove” one solution better than another –No value in dissing other protocols

6. 64th IETF Vancouver November 2005 Looking for Consensus Momentum appears to be behind draft-vasseur-pce- pcep-02.txt –Some concerns, but no killers Draft is not perfect –Needs implementation experience –Needs refinement of documentation –Needs state machine –Etc. Proposal: –Accept PCEP as working group draft –All work to improve the technical and documentation quality –Implement and experiment –Throw it out if it doesn’t work