[Idr] Shepherd's report on WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-car-02

[Susan Hares <[e-mail]>]

Below is the summary of the shepherd's report for
The WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-car-02.

Since a majority of the WG suggested progressing this
draft as experimental, it is important to discuss these open issues
so that we can move forward with the experimental draft.

To quicken this process, the WG chairs have scheduled
An interim to discuss open issues with CAR, CT, and Flowspec v2
on 9/25 (next Monday).

The authors of the CAR will present on
1.  Use of the two NLRIs for CAR SAFI and VPN CAR SAFI
2.  Procedures for type 1 and type 2 Routes for CAR SAFI and VPN CAR SAFI
3.  Use of CAR SAFI and VPN CAR SAFI for infrastructure routes
4.  Service Routes versus Infrastructure routes


WG LC Shepherd's report
=======================================
IDR Wiki link: https://wiki.ietf.org/e/en/group/idr/CAR-WGLC

The WG LC for CAR discussed the changes from
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-car-01 to draft-ietf-idr-bgp-02 in a single mail thread.

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/o8I1dOTIiLc-ImelfQUij1pQOJk/

This discussion centered around the additions in sections 8-10
With the following questions:
1) Motivation for IP Prefix NLRI
2) Why was the type 2 NLRI - IP Prefix added?
3) Questions on clarity of support for Type 2 NLRI (IP Prefix)  in sections
4) Security concerns for the AFI/SAFI
5) Lack of clarity in procedures in sections 8-10
6) Relationship among multiple drafts related to SRv6
7) Using CAR SAFI and CAR VPN SAFI for transport
(infrastructure routes)
8) Use of CAR-SAFIs for Service Families

Please note there is only 1 implementation for the Type 2 NLRI (IP Prefix).

This shepherd's report provides a review and action items for most
of these issues.

The Routing Directorate review found the introduction needed some improvement.
Link:  https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/0X_q_e09ejtb0NZQ25smUrklwmQ/
Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
Review result: Has Issues

It should cover
1) introduction to AFI/SAFIs
2) introduction of two NLRI types.

The Ops/NM directorate found
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/4SgOciKKtA9nap1M-f6eHRKNtWc/

Raised issues on
1) amount of abbreviations without explanation

2)In this draft, it says E is globally unique, which makes E-C in that
order unique.  Can this be explained.
3) Why the type 2 NLRI for IP Prefix was needed.
4) dependency on the progression of draft-ietf-hr-spring-intentaware-routing-using-color?
5) Needing an operations section
6) Several Editorial issues (see list in email).