Subject: [Pce] Proposed Implementation Policy for PCE WG

From: Dhruv Dhody <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 22:01:32 +0530

Hi WG,

In discussion with our ADs and with other WG chairs in the Routing
Area, the PCE chairs have decided that it would be good for the
working group to have a stated policy about what implementation is
needed, desired, or required before a draft can advance for
publication as an RFC. The full range of options is available from "no
implementation required" up to "multiple independent and
inter-operable implementations required". The purposes are to help
ensure quality and implementable RFCs, to make sure that our work is
truly relevant and needed, and to understand the relative priorities
of our work.

The chairs briefly mentioned this at the IETF 104 PCE WG meeting, and
we promised to start a discussion on what 'Implementation Policy' to
set for the PCE WG.

This is a subject for the WG to decide through the usual rough
consensus, but the chairs would like to start the discussion with a
proposal as follows -

"All WG I-Ds are required to include an 'Implementation Status'
Section (as per RFC7942) to document known existing or planned
implementations. The chairs can make exceptions on a per-document
basis."

Please raise any concern with the proposed implementation policy by
24th April 2019.

Thanks!
Adrian, Dhruv & Julien

---

From: Dhruv Dhody <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 23:29:25 +0530

Hi WG,

You still have a few days (till 24th) to raise any concerns with the
proposed implementation policy!

Thanks!
PCE Chairs