Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext [5/2 - 5/16/2018]

tom petch <> Tue, 04 June 2019 12:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB5E120033 for <>; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 05:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.247
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.247 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RATWARE_MS_HASH=2.148, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SJI5S3udPiri for <>; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 05:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3BA7120098 for <>; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 05:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector1-btconnect-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ZhM49SZqyc+14dBhwIjnAyGA+NPEXhGYoK2xlz9TpMU=; b=jfh9Tk0MjyPg1PqXHeK1scdyVjj+/xFme18C2jv33DOvRJ2C0cct2j0P3axrZ6CNQY9DQHGiTtamj17CzKZnCsrtogupP3y7sb0/s2/K3xTJqeIk3p3HJErskt2oVWXsDs8C6/Z6kQwSfVGjyACoeDCgXMWqJbCjG3ubyEVZScM=
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1965.4; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:01:33 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::7537:44ee:88c1:dd6d]) by ([fe80::7537:44ee:88c1:dd6d%7]) with mapi id 15.20.1965.011; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:01:32 +0000
From: tom petch <>
To: Susan Hares <>, 'Robert Raszuk' <>
CC: "'idr@ietf. org'" <>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext [5/2 - 5/16/2018]
Thread-Index: AQHVGrGavPWSjB+V1U2YSMUv1wXX6A==
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 12:01:32 +0000
Message-ID: <06b001d51acc$aa5efca0$>
References: <01ce01d5167f$d263a120$772ae360$> <> <02cf01d51ab1$052bfc80$> <004201d51abd$498a5000$dc9ef000$> <> <005301d51ac3$4b6e6a90$e24b3fb0$>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-clientproxiedby: LO2P265CA0411.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:a0::15) To (2603:10a6:802:20::28)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 7d965ea2-f8b7-404b-b65d-08d6e8e462a3
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:VI1PR07MB4719;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR07MB4719:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0058ABBBC7
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(366004)(396003)(346002)(13464003)(189003)(199004)(53754006)(110136005)(86362001)(25786009)(6246003)(53936002)(6506007)(386003)(8936002)(50226002)(476003)(486006)(84392002)(7736002)(81166006)(73956011)(14496001)(478600001)(66946007)(966005)(81156014)(66446008)(14454004)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(5660300002)(2906002)(9686003)(186003)(53546011)(68736007)(4720700003)(26005)(4326008)(316002)(99286004)(8676002)(1556002)(81686011)(81816011)(76176011)(52116002)(305945005)(102836004)(6306002)(71190400001)(44716002)(71200400001)(446003)(62236002)(6436002)(44736005)(6116002)(3846002)(6512007)(61296003)(66066001)(6486002)(229853002)(66574012)(14444005)(256004)(74416001)(7726001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:VI1PR07MB4719;; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:0;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: N8ZYBsoV041Qh2vXub0upsS3LwCWxQg7yPvriE9eG6oJHQTPt6zo5QCFBlxk+KTccTTlSlFdejVEfvuybzB50Ol7qP1LMj42oTY2EiS0lLd8O5rZZJCfrHKsdMvLSD9r+D07dlyylWGe0NL3Ju7ElXOBEbzAIXvjlMCz9ki5H/noKIMyw/BLS6YZdlRTiCSw7iJU2/izwiI3bTs9RnT32jbLb6+NGH5oYZ0YwE5qug/2Z0qCoL3gJHiIay1e8nODoTKYbxB7SkccOHK4GqUzFxB6/mk2Wk+mxpWBNwXOdPfq8J7nBrCmZZI5OlinfEGk9B7EvZV82dW9oZRRY7oUcx77TY4kFP1AazEeEyQjfcGaETb7IBTXJhJK1GLAJcpkNSME+e7Jso38Xe8r+1kFTvyCzrljC6yS21d07XTJW2w=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7d965ea2-f8b7-404b-b65d-08d6e8e462a3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Jun 2019 12:01:32.7895 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: cf8853ed-96e5-465b-9185-806bfe185e30
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR07MB4719
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext [5/2 - 5/16/2018]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 12:01:41 -0000


Sorry I was too terse, but yes, Christoph and Robert provided the

Draft names do disappear with the RFC but then there are times we need
to look back at the history, and then, having a single name for the
adopted I-D is simplest. On the other hand, when I search or collate the
names, in folders, e-mails etc having a common string - bgp-ls rather
than bgpls - makes things easier for me to find.

So changing the name complicates things, leaving it as-is complicates
things. Grrr why did I not spot this prior to adoption?

On balance, I think leave the name as is but I want you to agree with

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Hares" <>
To: "'Robert Raszuk'" <>
Cc: "'idr@ietf. org'" <>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 - 5/16/2018]


Ah…  thanks for unpacking Tom’s message.    Since John and I are focused
on getting all the WG drafts toward RFC (where the draft name does not
matter), I had not consider this point.  Acee and Chris in LSR have
standardized on a particular form of bgp-ls.   Tom Petch has a good

As to the 99% of BGP-LS,  that’s a question the chairs and ADs tried to
ask the WG in 2018.   The WG did not engage on that discussion.

In order to protect the BGP stream,  the ADs/Chairs pushed for
draft-ketana-rfc7752bis.txt (for improved error handling) and larger BGP
messages (see raft-ietf-idr-bgp-extended-messages-30.txt).


 Sue Hares

From: Idr [] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 6:30 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: idr@ietf. org
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 - 5/16/2018]

Hi Sue,

To me Tom was simply pointing out difference in name if the draft where
dash is missing in "bgp-ls" string in this specific case.

On the other points you have raised I think it is missing the
fundamental one ... since when what used to be a wg focused in the past
on interdomain routing became a mainstream of link state, topology, bfd,
pce data collection and distribution.

Even charter aside IMO by shifting IDR focus and processing 99% of
BGP-LS related documents we are doing huge disservice to Internet and
routing related needs without even bringing the aspect of protocol

Kind regards,


On Tue, Jun 4, 2019, 12:07 Susan Hares <> wrote:


Your short mail usually has good suggestions, so I tried to decode this
message - but I failed.  I'm guessing at the question.

If this question is about the multiple drafts for the BGP-LS, see my
yesterday to Jeff regarding drafts from LSR with BGP-LS code points and
early allocations.
If this question is about BGP-LS error handling, see my wish/hope that
the draft-ketana-rfc7752bis.txt will be ready for adoption soon.
If this question is about early code point allocation,  this early
allocation policy is IESG/IANA policy.  If you wish me to ask for a
please unpack the message so I can work on it.

Cheerily, Susan

-----Original Message-----
From: Idr [] On Behalf Of tom petch
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 4:44 AM
To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant); Susan Hares;
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 -

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <>
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2019 2:36 AM

Hello All,

The WG version of this draft has been posted as below


You have done exactly what you were asked to do, but it is unfortunate
all the other ID have bgp-ls while this has bgpls.


Are you happy to live with this?

Tom Petch

We would like to request for early code point allocation from IANA to
implementations with suggested code points as indicated below:

   The following codepoints is suggested (to be assigned by IANA) from
   within the sub-registry called "BGP-LS NLRI-Types":

    | Type | NLRI Type                  |   Reference   |
    |  6   | SRv6 SID                   | this document |

   The following TLV codepoints are suggested (to be assigned by IANA)
   from within the sub-registry called "BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link
   Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs":

   | TLV Code |             Description                | Value defined |
   |  Point   |                                        |       in      |
   |  1038    |   SRv6 Capabilities TLV                | this document |
   |  1106    |   SRv6 End.X SID TLV                   | this document |
   |  1107    |   IS-IS SRv6 LAN End.X SID TLV         | this document |
  |  1108    |   OSPFv3 SRv6 LAN End.X SID TLV        | this document |
   |  1162    |   SRv6 Locator TLV                     | this document |
   |   518    |   SRv6 SID Information TLV             | this document |
   |  1250    |   SRv6 Endpoint Function TLV           | this document |

   |  1251    |   SRv6 BGP Peer Node SID TLV           | this document |


From: Susan Hares <>
Sent: 30 May 2019 06:07
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dawra-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext
[5/2 - 5/16/2018]

draft-dwara-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext has been adopted.
The authors should submit the draft as:

As soon as this draft has been submitted, an early code point allocation
call will begin.

Cheerily, Sue


> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list

Idr mailing list

Idr mailing list


> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list