Re: [Idr] WG adoption for draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-05.txt (10/20/2023 to 11/6/2023)

[Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]>]

I support WG adoption.

Both drafts are different and have completely different purposes and should
not  to be combined.

draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-05
This draft defines an SR policy extension for the SID list ID attribute
that can be advertised in BGP.  This SID ID is also used to identify the
SID list to be sent to controller to gather statistics.


draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric/

This draft defines an SR policy metric path possibly a new path attribute
for best path selection in case there are multiple paths to same
destination.

Few questions

Today a SID list has a name that is referred to to by the SR policy
candidate path that the BSID binds  to the forwarding plane for the path to
be instantiated.

Could the Active candidate path defined by the  SID list using manual or
autogenerated BSID to bind candidate path to forwarding plane - Could the
BSID be used ad the identifier or even the name of the SID  list be used as
the SID ID in the SR policy TEA that is distributed to the controller?

Thanks

Gyan

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 2:08 PM Susan Hares <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This begins a 2-week WG Adoption poll for
> draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-05.txt
>
> (10/20/2023 to 11/6/2023)
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id/
>
>
>
> The authors should respond to this email with an email indicating whether
> they know of any IPR related to this draft.
>
>
>
> This draft proposes a change to the
>
> Tunnel Encaps Attribute for the SR Policy Tunnel type
>
> in the segment list.  The change is to add
>
> a segment list identifier:
>
>
>
>          Tunnel Encaps Attribute (23)
>
>             Tunnel Type: SR Policy
>
>                 Binding SID
>
>                 SRv6 Binding SID
>
>                 Preference
>
>                 Priority
>
>                 Policy Name
>
>                 Policy Candidate Path Name
>
>                 Explicit NULL Label Policy (ENLP)
>
>                 Segment List
>
>                     Weight
>
>                     Segment List Identifier
>
>                     Segment
>
>                     Segment
>
>
>
> Please note that draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05.txt
>
> Proposes adding a metric value to the segment list.
>
>
>
> In your comments on adoption, please consider:
>
> 1.       Should we merge draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05
>
> And drft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id?
>
> 2.       Is there value in adding a segment list identifier?
>
> 3.       Is there any technical problem with the description and the
> procedures for handling the segment list identifier?
>
>
>
> Cheerily, Sue Hares
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>