[Idr] Shepherd reviews draft-ietf-idr-sr-te-policy-attr-02

[Susan Hares <[e-mail]>]

Shepherd reviews draft-ietf-idr-sr-te-policy-attr-02
Summary
draft: draft-ietf-idr-sr-te-policy-attr<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-sr-te-policy-attr/>
Type: Proposed Standard
status: WG Draft
adopted: 8/12/2024 (adoption call: 7/12/2024 - 7/30/2024)
current version: 02
Early Allocation: -03 required prior to Early Allocation request
implementations: H3C and ZTE (2 implementations)
bgp-ls draft: would need to augment deraft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy

Review -02
Reviewer: Susan Hares
draft: draft-ietf-idr-sr--te-policy-attr-02<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-sr-te-policy-attr-02>
Status of Technical issues from -01 Review
Review-01, Issue-1: Resolved in section 1 in the following text:
BGP UPDATE message
sends the NLRI that identifies an SR Policy Candidate Path, and the
attributes that encode the segment lists and other details of that SR
Policy Candidate Path. These BGP attributes include the Tunnel
Encapsulation Attribute [RFC9012<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9012/>] with the SR Policy Tunnel-Type, and
it encodes SR Policy tunnel information (per
[I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi]).
Review-01, Issue-2: Resolved in section with the text:
This section defines four new Segment types and the corresponding
Segment Sub-TLVs of Segment List Sub-TLV to provide algorithm
information for SR-MPLS Adjacency-SIDs. The Segment Sub-TLVs in this
document are only defined for the Segment list Sub-TLV used by the
Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute with the SR Policy Tunnel-Type as per
[I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi]. All other usages are outside the
scope of this document.
review-01, Issue-3: Resolved by the text in section 3 of:
The processing procedures for SID with algorithm specified in
[RFC9256<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9256/>] and [I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext] are still applicable
for the new segment types. Just as in [I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi],
the segment list sub-TLVs specified in this document (sections 3.1,
3.2, 3.3, and 3.4) MAY repeat multiple times within the segment-list
Sub-TLV. BGP only checks the syntax of the fields, but the semantic
meaning is check by the consumer. When the algorithm is not
specified for the SID types above which optionally allow for it, the
headend SHOULD use the Strict Shortest Path algorithm if available;
otherwise, it SHOULD use the default Shortest Path algorithm.
review-01, Issue-4 - resolved with the inclusion of section 6

The following needs to be corrected prior to early allocation for this draft:
Review-02, Issue-1 - Security section needs to describe critical information
The information in segment types L-O are critical pieces of information about the infrastructure of a network or multiple network segments. The Security section needs to mention that the operators need to carefully restrict access to the information contained in segments L-O. A list of the unique information is useful in this section.