Return-Path: X-Original-To: idr@mail2.ietf.org Delivered-To: idr@mail2.ietf.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B2493090E8 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 00:07:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.195 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.195 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 40xR8hOtgIV0 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 00:07:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0371D93090AD for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 00:07:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.224.83]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4dKc1V653HzHnH6K for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 16:06:38 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemh500011.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.181.142]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 739DF40086 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 16:07:34 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemq100016.china.huawei.com (7.202.195.35) by kwepemh500011.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 16:07:33 +0800 Received: from frapema500005.china.huawei.com (7.182.19.99) by kwepemq100016.china.huawei.com (7.202.195.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 16:07:32 +0800 Received: from frapema500005.china.huawei.com ([7.182.19.99]) by frapema500005.china.huawei.com ([7.182.19.99]) with mapi id 15.02.1544.011; Mon, 1 Dec 2025 09:07:30 +0100 From: Cheng Li To: Susan Hares , idr Thread-Topic: [Idr] BGP-SR: Shepherd's review for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu-12 Thread-Index: AdxMauJkN8igMq5jSH6qogP4HKF1vgWLmX5g Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 08:07:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.215.179.187] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_fe69d5e0b867401c8af774371178484ahuaweicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID-Hash: JTUHRDUNVGXR3RCSITIUBX2LLY5WNGLQ X-Message-ID-Hash: JTUHRDUNVGXR3RCSITIUBX2LLY5WNGLQ X-MailFrom: c.l@huawei.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-idr.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: zengguanming X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6 Precedence: list Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BIdr=5D_Re=3A_BGP-SR=3A_Shepherd=27s_review_for_draft-ietf-idr-s?= =?utf-8?q?r-policy-path-mtu-12?= List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --_000_fe69d5e0b867401c8af774371178484ahuaweicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Sue Thank you for your help! Based on Shepherd Review on -12, we have made the following modifications i= n -13 revision: (1) Technical issues from -10 has been resolved, specifically: "Issue-4: Missing Manageability section Please add an section to indicate how operators may manage set or monitor the PATH MTU via existing Yang modules or BGP-LS support. If these do not exist, suggest whether a yang module or BGP-LS support woul= d be useful." We have added a section of Manageability Considerations: "Currently, there is no standardized YANG data model that explicitly expose= s the Path MTU value carried in the BGP SR Policy Path MTU Sub-TLV to netwo= rk management systems or operators. Similarly, while BGP-LS can distribute = link-level MTU information (as defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-link-mtu]), = it does not natively convey end-to-end Path MTU values associated with spec= ific SR Policies. Standardized manageability support would significantly improve operational = visibility and automation. Therefore, the authors recommend a YANG Module E= xtension: Extend the YANG data model for SR Policies (e.g., ietf-sr-policy = or vendor-specific models) to include a read-only leaf for path-mtu, reflec= ting the value received via BGP or configured locally. This would enable NE= TCONF/RESTCONF-based retrieval and integration with network assurance syste= ms." Other issues from -10 have already been solved in the past revisions. (2) the name of the IANA registry has been modified as "SR Policy Segment = List Sub-TLVs" Yours, Cheng and Guanming From: Susan Hares Sent: Monday, November 3, 2025 9:45 AM To: idr Subject: [Idr] BGP-SR: Shepherd's review for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-= mtu-12 Draft Summary draft: [draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu](/group/idr/implementations/draf= t-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu) Type: Proposed Standard status: WG Draft, needs revision 13 prior to early allocation adopted: [9/1/2024](https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/xUckKQncQ4rLV= CCAkBO6bQ6zcuk/) (8/1 to 8/30 call) current version: -12 Early Allocation: yes, needs -13 revision implementations: 1 (Huawei in VRP) related bgp-ls draft: none Shepherd Review on -12 **Summary:** Technical issues from -10 are not resolved in -12. Also, the n= ame of the IANA registry is: SR Policy Segment List Sub-TLVs. Please make these corre= ction in -13. Next steps: 1. Publish -13 with corrections 2. Get shepherd's review of -13 3. If -13 is ok, then do 2 week Early Allocation call Sue Hares --_000_fe69d5e0b867401c8af774371178484ahuaweicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hell= o Sue

 

Than= k you for your help!

 

Base= d on Shepherd Review on -12, we have made the following modifications in -1= 3 revision:

 

(1)    Technical issues from -10 has been resolved, specifically:

R= 20;Issue-4:  Missing Manageability section

 

Plea= se add an section to indicate how operators may manage set or monitor<= /o:p>

the = PATH MTU via existing Yang modules or BGP-LS support.

 

If t= hese do not exist, suggest whether a yang module or BGP-LS support would be= useful.”

 

We h= ave added a section of Manageability Considerations:

R= 20;Currently, there is no standardized YANG data model that explicitly expo= ses the Path MTU value carried in the BGP SR Policy Path MTU Sub-TLV to net= work management systems or operators. Similarly, while BGP-LS can distribute link-level MTU information (as defined in [I-D= .ietf-idr-bgp-ls-link-mtu]), it does not natively convey end-to-end Path MT= U values associated with specific SR Policies.

 

Stan= dardized manageability support would significantly improve operational visi= bility and automation. Therefore, the authors recommend a YANG Module Exten= sion: Extend the YANG data model for SR Policies (e.g., ietf-sr-policy or vendor-specific models) to include a rea= d-only leaf for path-mtu, reflecting the value received via BGP or configur= ed locally. This would enable NETCONF/RESTCONF-based retrieval and integrat= ion with network assurance systems.”

 

 

Othe= r issues from -10 have already been solved in the past revisions.

 

(2) =  the name of the IANA registry has been modified as “SR Policy S= egment List Sub-TLVs”

 

Your= s,

Chen= g and Guanming

 

From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Sent: Monday, November 3, 2025 9:45 AM
To: idr <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: [Idr] BGP-SR: Shepherd's review for draft-ietf-idr-sr-polic= y-path-mtu-12

 

 

Draf= t Summary

draf= t:  [draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu](/group/idr/implementations/dra= ft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu)

Type= : Proposed Standard

stat= us: WG Draft, needs revision 13 prior to early allocation  =

adop= ted: [9/1/2024](https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/xUckKQncQ= 4rLVCCAkBO6bQ6zcuk/) (8/1 to 8/30 call)

curr= ent version: -12

Earl= y Allocation: yes, needs -13 revision

impl= ementations: 1 (Huawei in VRP)  

rela= ted bgp-ls draft:  none

 

Shep= herd Review on -12

**Su= mmary:** Technical issues from -10 are not resolved in -12. Also, the name = of the

IANA= registry is: SR Policy Segment List Sub-TLVs.  Please make these corr= ection in -13.

 

Next= steps:

1. P= ublish -13 with corrections

2. G= et shepherd's review of -13

3. I= f -13 is ok, then do 2 week Early Allocation call

 

Sue = Hares

 

--_000_fe69d5e0b867401c8af774371178484ahuaweicom_--