[Idr] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-10

[Ned Smith via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Reviewer: Ned Smith
Review result: Has Nits

Ned M. Smith Review
2025-02-05

I have reviewed draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy revision 10, which specifies
BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) extensions for advertising Segment Routing (SR)
Policies. The draft appears to be ready but there are a few nits that caught my
attention. The authors may want to make changes or judge that for the intended
audience no changes are needed.

Notes:

1) "Flags: 1-octet field with following bit positions defined.  Other bits MUST
be cleared by the originator and MUST be ignored by a receiver." [NMS] Use of
the word "cleared" may be ambiguous. Other similar language uses "set to 0".
There are multiple occurrences of this concern.

2) "Bandwidth: 4 octets which specify the desired bandwidth in unit of bytes
per second in IEEE floating point format." [NMS] This appears to be a normative
requirement on IEEE floating point format but doesn't cite the specification.
There are multiple occurrences of this.

3) "4 octets which carry a 32-bit unsigned non-zero number"
[NMS] Using "number" may be ambiguous. Other text uses, e.g., "integer". The
byte order for multibyte numbers isn't explicitly specified. The reader might
presume big-endian from the contexts, but IMO it doesn't hurt to state
assumptions the authors are making.

4) In the section 8.6.  BGP-LS SR Policy Metric Type table, the code points 121
- 127 are omitted. Is this on purpose?