IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Idr] Re: draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-09 - WG adoption call (7/22/2024 to 8/9/2024)

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com> Thu, 25 July 2024 04:38 UTC

Return-Path: <jie.dong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1266BC1DA1F8 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 21:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.904
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SxEYsFP0uVzU for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 21:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DE36C180B49 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 21:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4WTylK06yzz6HJZX for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:36:45 +0800 (CST)
Received: from lhrpeml500001.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.213]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38DFF140B38 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:38:25 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggpemf200007.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.2) by lhrpeml500001.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 05:38:24 +0100
Received: from kwepemf100006.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.220) by dggpemf200007.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:38:22 +0800
Received: from kwepemf100006.china.huawei.com ([7.202.181.220]) by kwepemf100006.china.huawei.com ([7.202.181.220]) with mapi id 15.02.1544.011; Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:38:21 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-09 - WG adoption call (7/22/2024 to 8/9/2024)
Thread-Index: AdrcnyW9mFPLN2xiQEq4/zs9NUSVSgBrLBaC
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 04:38:21 +0000
Message-ID: <dad30129900b49479b71fc46943efa2a@huawei.com>
References: <CO1PR08MB6611D8EC1AC1698E609F439AB3A92@CO1PR08MB6611.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO1PR08MB6611D8EC1AC1698E609F439AB3A92@CO1PR08MB6611.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.48.242.81]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID-Hash: ORT2R42ICEPGRHWPGC37CZRJ5JFOWGPB
X-Message-ID-Hash: ORT2R42ICEPGRHWPGC37CZRJ5JFOWGPB
X-MailFrom: jie.dong@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
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Idr] Re: draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-09 - WG adoption call (7/22/2024 to 8/9/2024)
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/AKJFbjX-y8Uy1Flj80VNDFePG3c>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:idr-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:idr-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:idr-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Sue, 

I support the adoption as a coauthor. 

Please find my replies to the questions inline:

________________________________________
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 9:41
To: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-09 - WG adoption call (7/22/2024 to 8/9/2024)

This begins a 2+ week WG adoption call (7/22 to 8/9/2024)for
draft-chen-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-09.txt.
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp/)

The authors should respond to this WG adoption call with an email with the IPR statement.

Document focus:
This document defines a new TLV in BGP-LS to report the NRP-ID
associated with an SR Candidate Policy Path (CP).

Links to Spring: During the 5/20/2024 interim, the following question was raised:
What is the relationship between the information in this draft and the information in draft-ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments?

Ran answered the following:
Due to the resource SID mechanism defined in the draft-ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments/)
the headend node does not have information about the relationship between
Candidate Path (CP) and NRP IDs, so it currently does not consider reporting the
relationship between CP and NRP ID. The current draft is only for the scenario
where data packets carry NRP ID.  The NRP ID is used with the normal SR SID as
the resource used will be indicated by the NRP-ID.  An SR Policy candidate path(CP)
may be instantiated with a specific NRP on the headend node via a local configuration,
PCEP, or BGP SR Policy signaling. Then the state and attributes of the NRP associated
with the candidate path of SR policy can be distributed to the controller.

In your discussion, please consider:


  1.  Is the addition of NRP-ID information to SR BGP-LS information valuable to networks?

[Jie] Yes. 

  2.  Does the draft clearly specify the TLV?

[Jie] Yes.

  3.  Are there any security concerns about reporting NRP-ID?

[Jie] No.

  4.  Is this document ready to adopt?

[Jie] Yes.

Best regards,
Jie

Cheerily, Sue

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status