Re: [auth48] [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9514 <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-14> for your review

[Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>]

Hi Clarence, Gaurav, and Andrew,

Thank you for your replies. Your approvals have been noted:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9514

Andrew - We have updated to “PeerNode” and “PeerSet” per your suggestion. 

Updated XML file:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514.xml

Updated output files:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514.txt
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514.pdf
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514.html

Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514-auth48diff.html

Diff files showing all changes:
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514-diff.html
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514-rfcdiff.html (side-by-side diff)
 https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9514-alt-diff.html (diff showing changes where text is moved or deleted)

We will now ask IANA to update its registry accordingly prior to moving this document forward in the publication process.

Best regards,
RFC Editor/ap


> On Nov 22, 2023, at 2:38 AM, Andrew Alston - IETF <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi There,
> 
> One minor correction - though am free to be wrong here.  First paragraph of 7.2 second last line refers to “Peer Node” and “Peer Set” - pretty sure this should be PeerNode and PeerSet as per the rest of the document.
> 
> Other than that I’m fine with the rest of the changes
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Andrew 
> 
> Get Outlook for iOS
> 
> Internal All Employees
> From: Gaurav Dawra <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 11:26:57 AM
> To: Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>; Mach Chen <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET <[e-mail]>; Ketan Talaulikar <[e-mail]>; Madison Church <[e-mail]>; Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>; RFC Editor <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9514 <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-14> for your review
>  
> CAUTION: This email has originated from a free email service commonly used for personal email services, please be guided accordingly especially if this email is asking to click links or share information.
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I approve
> 
> Gaurav
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On Nov 22, 2023, at 1:59 PM, Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I approve.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Clarence
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 02:52
> >> To: Mach Chen <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> >> Cc: DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET <[e-mail]>; Ketan
> >> Talaulikar <[e-mail]>; Madison Church <[e-mail]>;
> >> Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Alvaro
> >> Retana <[e-mail]>; RFC Editor <[e-mail]>; idr-
> >> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; auth48archive@rfc-
> >> editor.org
> >> Subject: Re: [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9514 <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-14> for
> >> your review
> >>
> >> Hi Daniel and Mach,
> >>
> >> Your approvals have been noted on the AUTH48 status page:
> >> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9514&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942372595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=c0630wJPUv2LksgVJOmd0XFgkeiBl14UFa7FI4ZP3e4%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> RFC Editor/ap
> >>
> >>>> On Nov 21, 2023, at 5:11 PM, Mach Chen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Alanna,
> >>>
> >>> I approve the publication of this document.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Mach
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 2:05 AM
> >>>> To: [e-mail]; Ketan Talaulikar
> >>>> <[e-mail]>
> >>>> Cc: Madison Church <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Mach Chen
> >>>> <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> >>>> [e-mail]; Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>; RFC
> >>>> Editor <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> >>>> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> >>>> Subject: Re: [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9514
> >>>> <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-14>
> >>>> for your review
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Ketan and Bruno,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you for your replies. Your approvals have been noted on the
> >>>> AUTH48 status page:
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9514&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942372595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=c0630wJPUv2LksgVJOmd0XFgkeiBl14UFa7FI4ZP3e4%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>> Ketan - We have updated the files with your proposed text.
> >>>>
> >>>> Updated XML file:
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.xml&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942372595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=hFvyXIIMkfwh4VcTqXCtZvpahbwH91BxY0xOs0gdO4A%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>> Updated output files:
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.txt&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942372595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OMfMasHCsWEYtJ%2BM04Bomg4V2f%2B4wIdLATTxu2RQCyw%3D&reserved=0
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942372595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gRq5ouKsF%2BBXZrdTKNtIVsHFCJ9hdbTYmzGXXs5PAqw%3D&reserved=0
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lRG79xK6QwchWmOBdASilngIUiq3nGYRk54mugSa3Oc%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>> Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZrEs6nGtv9QXZVwc8xra2k6QmAu0EnCZpFQM8c0ezXY%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>> Diff files showing all changes:
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P0saJsEg88F%2Bc6e18amS5Od4T1ONeiOrT0%2Be6R3sG14%3D&reserved=0
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dDbbj%2B6RSL6CVJfpTVf0yfLI5oa5f5J0QpszXQ2fAX0%3D&reserved=0 (side-by-side
> >>>> diff) https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-alt-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dZTsqb2Hh%2Fz5S9LPxn%2F0SaYBKgkBlkBn1XiSsEiij6w%3D&reserved=0 (diff
> >>>> showing changes where text is moved or deleted)
> >>>>
> >>>> We will await approvals from Gaurav, Clarence, Mach, Daniel, and the
> >>>> AD prior to moving this document forward.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 21, 2023, at 2:12 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Alanna,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the edits.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I approve the document.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> --Bruno
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Ketan Talaulikar <[e-mail]>
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 6:41 AM
> >>>>> To: Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> >>>>> Cc: Madison Church <[e-mail]>; DECRAENE Bruno
> >> INNOV/NET
> >>>>> <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> >>>> [e-mail];
> >>>>> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Alvaro Retana
> >>>>> <[e-mail]>; RFC Editor <[e-mail]>;
> >>>>> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> >>>>> [e-mail]
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9514
> >>>>> <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-14> for your review
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Alanna,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After reviewing the full text, I would suggest the following text
> >>>>> change
> >>>>>
> >>>>> OLD:
> >>>>> Only undefined flags MUST be set to 0 when originating and ignored
> >>>>> on
> >>>> receipt.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> NEW:
> >>>>> Undefined flags MUST be set to 0 when originating and ignored on
> >> receipt.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Along with the above change, please take this as an approval from my
> >> side.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Ketan
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 12:43 AM Alanna Paloma <[e-mail]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Ketan,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We have updated that text in the files.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Updated XML file:
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.xml&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=j6PLBkUjEYr1ZjhU46gV7rZwnWJMlAVy1qCxgLw%2Fb8Y%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Updated output files:
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.txt&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=AxVv1h3GYW8xBa7XJ7%2FdHVh71Oi%2BblYPZ9k44lkp8wA%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kH3TUIrggGBJq7PXJGibw0lZGUxR1Ppjgdgqrrbsvw8%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lRG79xK6QwchWmOBdASilngIUiq3nGYRk54mugSa3Oc%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZrEs6nGtv9QXZVwc8xra2k6QmAu0EnCZpFQM8c0ezXY%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Diff files showing all changes:
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P0saJsEg88F%2Bc6e18amS5Od4T1ONeiOrT0%2Be6R3sG14%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dDbbj%2B6RSL6CVJfpTVf0yfLI5oa5f5J0QpszXQ2fAX0%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>> (side-by-side
> >>>> diff)
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-alt-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dZTsqb2Hh%2Fz5S9LPxn%2F0SaYBKgkBlkBn1XiSsEiij6w%3D&reserved=0 (diff
> >>>>> showing changes where text is moved or deleted)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to
> >>>>> view the
> >>>> most recent version.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We will await approvals from each author and the AD prior to moving
> >>>> forward in the publication process.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> >>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9514&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JvzXIeW2VNhjARlB9a6FzOkD0pQWdji7hd1fH5iCBhE%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Nov 20, 2023, at 9:54 AM, Ketan Talaulikar
> >>>>>> <[e-mail]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Alanna,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This text works.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Ketan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:16 PM Alanna Paloma
> >> <[e-mail]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Ketan,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you for clarifying. Does the following text work?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps:
> >>>>>> No flags are currently defined for SRv6 SIDs corresponding to BGP
> >>>>>> EPE  or for advertisement of SRv6 SIDs using Direct as the
> >>>>>> Protocol- ID. Only undefined flags MUST be set to 0 when
> >>>>>> originating and ignored on receipt.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>> RFC Editor/ap
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2023, at 8:27 PM, Ketan Talaulikar
> >>>>>>> <[e-mail]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Madison,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please check inline below.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 4:39 AM Madison Church
> >>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi Ketan and Bruno,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you both for your replies! We have updated the document
> >>>> accordingly. We just have one followup item.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For the following:
> >>>>>>>> There is one issue with the changed text for "Flags" field in Section 7.1.
> >>>> The following sentence applies only for BGP EPE and Direct:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Flags MUST be set to 0 when originated and ignored on receipt.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> However, the breaking of the sentence could make a reader think
> >>>>>>>> as if
> >>>> it also applied to OSPF and ISIS. Can this be rephrased for clarity?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you for pointing this out. Is the intent that when flags are
> >>>> eventually defined for BGP EPE and Direct, those flags MUST be set to
> >>>> 0 when originated and ignored on receipt? Would the following work?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> KT> It is actually the other way around. Since no flags are
> >>>>>>> KT> defined for
> >>>> BGP EPE and Direct, they must be set to 0 when originating and
> >>>> ignored on receipt.  Once some flags are defined, then this (setting
> >>>> to 0 and ignoring on
> >>>> receipt) would apply only to the undefined flags alone. I hope that clarifies.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Ketan
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Perhaps:
> >>>>>>> No flags are currently defined for SRv6 SIDs corresponding to BGP
> >>>> EPE
> >>>>>>> or for advertisement of SRv6 SIDs using Direct as the Protocol-
> >>>>>>> ID, but when defined, the flags MUST be set to 0 when originated
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>> ignored on
> >>>>>>> receipt.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Updated XML file:
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.xml&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=j6PLBkUjEYr1ZjhU46gV7rZwnWJMlAVy1qCxgLw%2Fb8Y%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Updated output files:
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.txt&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=AxVv1h3GYW8xBa7XJ7%2FdHVh71Oi%2BblYPZ9k44lkp8wA%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kH3TUIrggGBJq7PXJGibw0lZGUxR1Ppjgdgqrrbsvw8%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lRG79xK6QwchWmOBdASilngIUiq3nGYRk54mugSa3Oc%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZrEs6nGtv9QXZVwc8xra2k6QmAu0EnCZpFQM8c0ezXY%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Diff files showing all changes:
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P0saJsEg88F%2Bc6e18amS5Od4T1ONeiOrT0%2Be6R3sG14%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dDbbj%2B6RSL6CVJfpTVf0yfLI5oa5f5J0QpszXQ2fAX0%3D&reserved=0
> >>>> (side-by-side diff)
> >>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-alt-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dZTsqb2Hh%2Fz5S9LPxn%2F0SaYBKgkBlkBn1XiSsEiij6w%3D&reserved=0 (diff
> >>>>>>> showing changes where text is moved or deleted)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to
> >>>>>>> view
> >>>> the most recent version.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> >>>>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9514&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JvzXIeW2VNhjARlB9a6FzOkD0pQWdji7hd1fH5iCBhE%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>> RFC Editor/mc
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2023, at 10:12 AM, Ketan Talaulikar
> >>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Bruno,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I agree with your suggestion. I find it more clear.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Ketan
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 9:34 PM <[e-mail]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi Madison, Ketan,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'm fine with this document.
> >>>>>>>> May be one comment, up to you
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In section 6
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> OLD:  This document defines the following new Link-State NLRI
> >>>>>>>> type
> >>>> for SRv6 SID information: SRv6 SID NLRI (6).
> >>>>>>>> NEW: This document defines the following new Link-State NLRI type
> >>>> for SRv6 SID information: SRv6 SID NLRI (type 6).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Motivation: the type number is not otherwise indicated in the
> >>>>>>>> rest of the section. I'd have a preference for an explicit
> >>>>>>>> mention of "type 6" rather than just "(6)". (I also find easier
> >>>>>>>> to be able to find type number by searching for "type" in the
> >>>>>>>> document)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thank you
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>> --Bruno
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Orange Restricted
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>> From: Madison Church <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2023 10:59 PM
> >>>>>>>> To: Ketan Talaulikar <[e-mail]>;
> >>>>>>>> [e-mail];[e-mail]; [e-mail];
> >>>>>>>> [e-mail]; DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET
> >>>>>>>> <[e-mail]>; Alvaro Retana
> >>>>>>>> <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>>> Cc: RFC Editor <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
> >>>>>>>> [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> >>>>>>>> [e-mail]
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AD] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9514
> >>>>>>>> <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-14> for your review
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Ketan,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have updated the document
> >>>>>>>> accordingly
> >>>> and all of our questions have been addressed.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction as we
> >>>>>>>> do
> >>>> not make changes once it has been published as an RFC. Contact us
> >>>> with any further updates or with your approval of the document in its
> >> current form.
> >>>> We will await approvals from each author prior to moving forward in
> >>>> the publication process.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Updated XML file:
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.xml&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=j6PLBkUjEYr1ZjhU46gV7rZwnWJMlAVy1qCxgLw%2Fb8Y%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Updated output files:
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.txt&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=AxVv1h3GYW8xBa7XJ7%2FdHVh71Oi%2BblYPZ9k44lkp8wA%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kH3TUIrggGBJq7PXJGibw0lZGUxR1Ppjgdgqrrbsvw8%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=lRG79xK6QwchWmOBdASilngIUiq3nGYRk54mugSa3Oc%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Diff file showing all changes made during AUTH48:
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-auth48diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZrEs6nGtv9QXZVwc8xra2k6QmAu0EnCZpFQM8c0ezXY%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Diff files showing all changes:
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942528848%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P0saJsEg88F%2Bc6e18amS5Od4T1ONeiOrT0%2Be6R3sG14%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-rfcdiff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942685101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=f%2BDLgdtBRyjL2cfDK78gs9wTuEW0qxVhUFDl%2FFlsfKI%3D&reserved=0
> >>>> (side-by-side diff)
> >>>>>>>>  https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauthors%2Frfc9514-alt-diff.html&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942685101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tGBi%2FdKpZu59P5vAQESrTSyI6hLqZNtNo9dCokASuyk%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>> (diff showing changes where text is moved or deleted)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to
> >>>>>>>> view
> >>>> the most recent version.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> >>>>>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9514&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942685101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=9OmrmePrMwqzeEs%2Bu1yJtOuK9bDnJUXuG1pQ9gtwoZI%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thank you!
> >>>>>>>> RFC Editor/mc
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 7, 2023, at 4:43 PM, Ketan Talaulikar
> >>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Madison,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Some comments on the changes made:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> a) Sec 7.2
> >>>>>>>>> The BGP PeerNode SID and PeerSet SID SIDs
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The "and" is required above.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> b) The caption for Table 1 is not correct - perhaps it should be
> >>>> "Addition to NLRI Types registry"
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please check inline below for responses.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 4:43 PM Madison Church
> >>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Greetings,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This is a friendly weekly reminder that this document awaits
> >>>>>>>>> your
> >>>> attention.  Please review the document-specific questions and AUTH48
> >>>> announcement. Let us know if we can be of assistance as you begin the
> >>>> AUTH48 review process.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The AUTH48 status page of this document is viewable at:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.r%2F&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942685101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=u9A3I0EAr%2FUhoOiVaik3jgDPnOG3OQWhJU7iNcX%2BFxo%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> fc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2Frfc9514&data=05%7C01%7Cbruno.decraene
> >>>>>>>>> %40orang
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> e.com%7C02e864ba4d2644ae030b08dbe2387dea%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc
> >>>> 4
> >>>>>>>>> 8b9253b6
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C638352504486493467%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3
> >>>> d8eyJ
> >>>>>>>>> WIjoiMC4
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000
> >>>>>>>>> %7C%7C%7
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> C&sdata=Cpt6r4cCixHPZy1Jq2q7fehFfz6%2BykuZ525O0sHZDrM%3D&reser
> >>>>>>>>> ved=0
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The AUTH48 FAQs are available at:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://www/.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> rfc-editor.org%2Ffaq%2F%23auth48&data=05%7C01%7Cbruno.decraene
> >>>>>>>>> %40orang
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> e.com%7C02e864ba4d2644ae030b08dbe2387dea%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc
> >>>> 4
> >>>>>>>>> 8b9253b6
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C638352504486493467%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3
> >>>> d8eyJ
> >>>>>>>>> WIjoiMC4
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>> wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000
> >>>>>>>>> %7C%7C%7
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >> C&sdata=SHr0rKLNh9zHcfcQvNG5x79H87UNXECZsu0i%2FSRbXLM%3D&rese
> >>>> r
> >>>>>>>>> ved=0
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>>>> RFC Editor/mc
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 30, 2023, at 7:08 PM, [e-mail] wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Authors and AD*,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> *AD, please see question #1 below.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Authors, while reviewing this document during AUTH48, please
> >>>> resolve (as necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML
> >> file.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 1) <!-- [rfced] *AD and authors, please let us know if the
> >>>>>>>>>> normative reference to RFC 7752 should be updated to 7752bis
> >>>>>>>>>> (see https://da/
> >>>>>>>>>> tatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis%2F17%2F
> >>>>>>>>>> &data=05
> >>>>>>>>>> %7C01%7Cbruno.decraene%40orange.com%7C02e864ba4d2644a
> >>>> e030b08
> >>>>>>>>>> dbe2387d
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> ea%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C638352504486
> >>>>>>>>>> 493467%7
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >> CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
> >>>>
> >> TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=VkPSnTD2bViS
> >>>> pByFQArRbM62HNxzuvznG7c3wLqNccM%3D&reserved=0). Note that
> >> 7752bis was
> >>>> previously approved and then put on hold by the AD, but it is now
> >>>> back in EDIT state. If we update to reference 7752bis, both this
> >>>> document and RFC-to-be 9513 will be published at the same time as
> >>>> 7752bis.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> It is not necessary to update this reference. However, if
> >>>> RFC7752bis is getting published "soon" then it does not harm to update.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Note that this document makes allocations in the "BGP-LS NLRI
> >>>> Types"
> >>>>>>>>>> and "BGP-LS NLRI and Attribute TLVs" registries.  The "BGP-LS
> >>>>>>>>>> NLRI and Attribute TLVs" registry was called the "BGP-LS Node
> >>>>>>>>>> Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute
> >>>>>>>>>> TLVs" registry in RFC 7752 and changed by 7752bis. The name
> >>>>>>>>>> currently in the IANA registry is "BGP-LS NLRI and Attribute
> >>>>>>>>>> TLVs". See
> >>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fbgp-ls-parameters%2Fbgp-ls-parameters&data=05%7C01%7Candrew-ietf%40liquid.tech%7C216803d972a94da49d5808dbeb34d839%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638362384942685101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=N%2FQwWEit0j1SnDf%2FxIhCDMw1OEVF%2Bi95BPCOQxqzNvU%3D&reserved=0.
> >>>> xht
> >>>> ml#node-descriptor-link-descriptor-prefix-descriptor-attribute-tlv.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> If you choose to retain the reference to RFC 7752, we will use
> >>>>>>>>>> the registry name in that document ("BGP-LS Node Descriptor,
> >>>>>>>>>> Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs"). If
> >>>>>>>>>> you choose to wait to publish at the same time as 7752bis, we
> >>>>>>>>>> will use the updated name ("BGP-LS
> >>>> NLRI and Attribute TLVs").
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Please see my response to the previous comment.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Please note that the title of the document has
> >>>>>>>>>> been updated as follows. Abbreviations have been expanded per
> >>>>>>>>>> Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide").
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> BGP Link State Extensions for SRv6
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Current:
> >>>>>>>>>> Border Gateway Protocol - Link State (BGP-LS) Extensions for
> >>>>>>>>>> Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6)
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Agree
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 3) <!-- [rfced] Would it be helpful to clarity "a separate document"
> >>>>>>>>>> here? Is this referring to a particular RFC?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> The BGP-LS address-family solution for SRv6  described in this
> >>>>>>>>>> document is similar to BGP-LS for SR for the
> >>>> MPLS
> >>>>>>>>>> data-plane defined in a separate document.
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Yes, that separate document is RFC9085.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 4) <!-- [rfced] We see two instances each of the following
> >>>>>>>>>> phrases in this document. May we update to one form for
> >>>> consistency?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ...using Direct as the Protocol-ID ...using Direct Protocol-ID
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> The first one seems better.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 5) <!-- [rfced] Should "and using" here be updated to either "using"
> >>>> or "and uses"?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a node is advertised via the
> >>>> BGP-
> >>>>>>>>>> LS Node NLRI and using the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a link is advertised via the
> >>>> BGP-
> >>>>>>>>>> LS Link NLRI and using the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a prefix is advertised via the
> >>>>>>>>>> BGP-LS Prefix NLRI and using the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as
> >>>> follows:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps ("using"):
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a node is advertised via the
> >>>> BGP-
> >>>>>>>>>> LS Node NLRI using the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a link is advertised via the
> >>>> BGP-
> >>>>>>>>>> LS Link NLRI using the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a prefix is advertised via the
> >>>>>>>>>> BGP-LS Prefix NLRI using the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Or ("and uses"):
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a node is advertised via the
> >>>> BGP-
> >>>>>>>>>> LS Node NLRI and uses the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a link is advertised via the
> >>>> BGP-
> >>>>>>>>>> LS Link NLRI and uses the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>> The SRv6 information pertaining to a prefix is advertised via the
> >>>>>>>>>> BGP-LS Prefix NLRI and uses the BGP-LS Attribute TLVs as
> >>>> follows:
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Your suggestion with "using" is more appropriate.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 6) <!-- [rfced] Please clarify "are identical as specified"
> >>>>>>>>>> here. Is the meaning that the new MSD types in this document
> >>>>>>>>>> have the same description and semantics as the MSD types
> >>>>>>>>>> defined in [I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions]? Note that
> >>>>>>>>>> this sentence appears twice in the document.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> The description and semantics of these new MSD-
> >>>>>>>>>> types for BGP-LS are identical as specified in
> >>>>>>>>>> [I-D.ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions].
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps:
> >>>>>>>>>> The description and semantics of these new MSD-
> >>>>>>>>>> types for BGP-LS are identical to those specified in
> >>>>>>>>>> [RFC9352].
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Agree with your proposal.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 7) <!-- [rfced] Please clarify "for IGPs, direct, and static
> >>>> configuration" here.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> *  Local Node Descriptors TLV: set of Node Descriptor TLVs for
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>    local node, as defined in [RFC7752] for IGPs, direct, and
> >>>> static
> >>>>>>>>>>    configuration or as defined in [RFC9086] for BGP protocol.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps:
> >>>>>>>>>> Local Node Descriptors TLV:  Set of Node Descriptor TLVs for
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>    local node as defined in [RFC7752] for IGPs, the Direct
> >>>> Protocol-ID,
> >>>>>>>>>>    and the Static configuration Protocol-ID or as defined in
> >>>> [RFC9086] for BGP.
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Agree with your proposal.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 8) <!-- [rfced] How may we update this text for clarity?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> For SRv6 SIDs corresponding to BGP EPE and when advertising
> >>>> SRv6 SID
> >>>>>>>>>> using Direct Protocol-ID, none are defined currently and they
> >>>> MUST
> >>>>>>>>>> be set to 0 when originated and ignored on receipt.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Perhaps:
> >>>>>>>>>> No flags are currently defined for SRv6 SIDs corresponding to
> >>>> BGP EPE
> >>>>>>>>>> or for advertisement of a SRv6 SID using the Direct Protocol-ID.
> >>>> Flags MUST
> >>>>>>>>>> be set to 0 when originated and ignored on receipt.
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Agree with your proposal.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 9) <!-- [rfced] We have updated "SET" to "set" at the end of
> >>>>>>>>>> this sentence. Please let us know any objections.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> For SRv6 BGP EPE Peer Set SID,
> >>>>>>>>>> multiple instances of this TLV (one for each peer in the "peer
> >>>> set")
> >>>>>>>>>> are associated with the SRv6 SID and the S-Flag is SET.
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Agree.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 10) <!-- [rfced] Section 9.2: FYI - We have updated the name
> >>>>>>>>>> of the registry in this section to "BGP-LS NLRI and
> >>>>>>>>>> Attribute TLVs" to match the title currently in the IANA
> >>>>>>>>>> registry (renamed per draft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis). Depending
> >>>>>>>>>> on the response to our question #1, we will either use the
> >>>>>>>>>> name of the registry per RFC
> >>>>>>>>>> 7752 ("BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix
> >>>>>>>>>> Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs") or the name per
> >>>> draft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis ("BGP-LS NLRI and Attribute TLVs").
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Link to registry:
> >>>>>>>>>> https://ww/
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> w.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fbgp-ls-parameters%2Fbgp-ls-parame
> >>>>>>>>>> ters.xht
> >>>>>>>>>> ml%23node-descriptor-link-descriptor-prefix-descriptor-attri
> >>>>>>>>>> bute-tlv
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> &data=05%7C01%7Cbruno.decraene%40orange.com%7C02e864ba4d2644
> >>>>>>>>>> ae030b08
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> dbe2387dea%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C6383
> >>>>>>>>>> 52504486
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >> 493467%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV
> >>>>>>>>>> 2luMzIiL
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >> CJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gaQ%2FEI
> >>>>>>>>>> 6K85rcFc
> >>>>>>>>>> REDGBmBklZCqyiaN2x6y06GocnAks%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> Please refer to my response to the first point.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 11) <!-- [rfced] Please confirm that "set up to routers" is correct.
> >>>>>>>>>> Or should this be updated to "set up for routers" ("for"
> >>>>>>>>>> instead of "to")? Also, is the capitaliation of "Link-State" correct?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Original:
> >>>>>>>>>> BGP peering sessions for
> >>>>>>>>>> address-families other than Link-State may be set up to routers
> >>>>>>>>>> outside the SR domain.
> >>>>>>>>>> -->
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KT> "set up to" is correct and the capitalization is correct as well.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 12) <!-- [rfced] Terminology
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> a) We note inconsistencies in the terms below throughout the text