[Idr] Re: draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template-04 - Need Revision + architecture back ground

[Zhangka <[e-mail]>]

Sue，

I need first discuss the architecture in the SPRING WG,  and then update the draft.
Time is limited, I will ask for another review session at IDR Interim after revise the new version.

Thank you very much.



Regards,

Ka


From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2024 10:03 PM
To: Zhangka <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: Shizhaoyin <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template-04 - Need Revision + architecture back ground

IETF-120 meeting has time at Friday session for you to present an update.

Please let me know if you wish to update your discussion at that time.

Sue

From: Zhangka <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2024 7:04 AM
To: Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: Shizhaoyin <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: RE: draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template-04 - Need Revision + architecture back ground



Sue,



Got it, will discuss and update a new version soon.



Thank you very much.



Regards,

Ka





-----Original Message-----

From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>]

Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2024 2:57 AM

To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Subject: draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template-04 - Need Revision + architecture back ground



Ka, Zhibo, Jie, and Qiangzhou:





Please review the notes from the 5/20 interim regarding draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template-04.txt.



Please revise your draft (-05) and ask for another review session at another IDR Meeting or IDR Interim.



We'll expect that you will also discuss the architecture in the SPRING WG.



Cheerily, Sue



===============





Background on Review:



Link to Email on 5/20/2024 Interim

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/XQkAVav3Kg23B5UsOO764_CPvOE/



Link to Notes from 5/20/204 Interim





Notes from 5/20/2024 interim:



5. BGP SR Policy Extensions for template [15 minutes]

draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template-03 [Ka Zhang)



Ketan: Is the template same as the path-profile ID in PCEP?



Ka: The use of template in this draft is similar to the path-profile.



Ketan: Suggest to align on the terminology, such as profile-ID. And add-reference to the PCE draft.  It might make the document clearer.

I agree with the purpose of the draft.



Ketan: Is this [the template] an attribute of the candidate path level or of the SR Policy? I think you need to explain what needs to happen at the candidate path level.



Ka: I will check on this later.



Alvaro: Can someone provide pointer to the PCE draft?

[pointer]

Template idea can be bigger than this draft. Sue called it the "template architecture" in her shepherd's review.

This draft is only about the TLV for the template ID.

There are a lot more details on the template and the policy.

Are they a subset of a SR Policy? Or are these a part of the group of policies. Can these policies be nested or not?  There is an assertionin the draft that if you do not know what the template ID is, please do nothing.  This could be a problem if you wanted the Template ID to do something.



Alvaro: The architecture of template needs to be discussed in SPRING.



Sue: You will note that Alvaro's concerns are behind quesitnos 5, 6, and 7 in my shepherd's review. I realize you have given me definitive answers.  I appreciate those answers, but you will need to discuss that architecture in Spring.



Jie Dong

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-alvarez-pce-path-profiles-04



Jie Dong: The PCE draft has expired. Need to consider how to move forward both the architecture and the protocol extensions.



Alvaro: [from Chat]: The draft expired a long time ago]



Ketan: [From chat]: But there are implementations with vendor specific TLVs