[Idr] Re: WG Adoption for draft-ssangli-idr-bgp-generic-metric-00 (7/9 to 7/23/2024)

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I support adoption of this document.

Encoding wise I think there is still room for WG discussion if atomic
metrics should be added during propagation or if we should rather move
towards per BGP segment metrics and let the receiver compute it as it seems
fit.

The latter could be actually much more inline with interdomain SR
architecture (under same administration - of course :).

Best,
Robert




On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 5:58 PM Susan Hares <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This begins a 2 week WG Adoption  (7/9/2024 to 7/23/2024)
>
> for draft-ssangli-idr-bgp-generic-metric-00
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ssangli-idr-bgp-generic-metric/
>
>
>
> All authors should reply to this email with an IPR Statement.
>
>
>
> This draft is a revision of the concepts in
>
> draft-ssangli-idr-bgp-generic-metric-aigp-08,
>
> But uses the NextHop Dependent Capability.
>
>
>
> A short description of from the document may help you review the text.
>
>
>
>    RFC7311 describes mechanism for carrying accumulated IGP cost across
>
>    BGP domains however it limits to IGP-metric only.  There is a need to
>
>    accumulate and propagate different types of metrics as it will aid in
>
>    intent-based end-to-end path across BGP domains.  This document
>
>    defines BGP extensions for Generic Metric sub-types that enable
>
>    different types of metrics to be accumulated and carried in BGP.
>
>    This is applicable when multiple domains exchange BGP routing
>
>    information.
>
>
>
>    This document proposes "Accumulated Metric" TLV in the Next-Hop
>
>    Dependent Capability (NHC) attribute described in
>
>    [I-D.ietf-idr-entropy-label] to carry the accumulated metric value
>
>    for end-to-end path, hereby referred as AMetric.  The AMetric
>
>    supports all the metric types defined in the IGP-Parameters metric-
>
>    type registry.  Additionally this document provides procedures for
>
>    computation and usage of accumulated generic metric value during the
>
>    BGP best path computation.
>
>
>
> In your comments, please consider:
>
>
>
> 1.  Does this mechanism solve the problem we have discussed in interims on AIGP metrics?
>
> 2.  Are there any downsides to using NHC?
>
> 3.  Do you support IDR working on this mechanism?
>
>
>
> Cheerily, Sue Hares
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>