Re: [Idr] draft-wu-idr-bgp-segment-allocation-ext-02.txt [4/18 - 5/2/2019] - 2 week WG adoption call

"Susan Hares" <> Wed, 24 April 2019 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 185481201DC; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.947
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c5JEzWQzKgi7; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8487C1200C7; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 07:23:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=;
From: Susan Hares <>
To: 'li zhenqiang' <>,
Cc: 'draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn' <>, 'draft-dong-lsr-sr-enhanced-vpn' <>
References: <013301d4f5ef$b1b51310$151f3930$> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 10:23:34 -0400
Message-ID: <025301d4faa9$4d6308e0$e8291aa0$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0254_01D4FA87.C65623D0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQCo3XkoQTpnez42PLUrnLEMTDc8HgHT6zliqJT1qSA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 190424-0, 04/24/2019), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-wu-idr-bgp-segment-allocation-ext-02.txt [4/18 - 5/2/2019] - 2 week WG adoption call
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: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:23:49 -0000



<wg-chair hat on> 

This is a good question to raise during the adoption of an IDR draft.   


I hope that the authors of the draft and others will indicate why they desire the BGP-LS method of allocating the SIDs.  As you are aware, the NETCONF based mechanism utilize a secure transport during the allocation.  BGP SHOULD run over an authenticated transport (MD5 or better yet TLS), but all BGP peers within a network may not run over the secure transport. 

<wg-chair hat off> 


<wg-member hat on>

As a WG member, I realize that each network makes choices on allocating SIDs and their control path.   Some of the reasons may not be able to be disclosed on a public mailing list.  However, it would be good for the authors to provide some reasons “Why BGP-LS” for allocation. 

<wg-member hat off> 


Sue Hares 



From: Idr [] On Behalf Of li zhenqiang
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 3:51 AM
To: Susan Hares;
Cc: draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn; draft-dong-lsr-sr-enhanced-vpn
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-wu-idr-bgp-segment-allocation-ext-02.txt [4/18 - 5/2/2019] - 2 week WG adoption call


Hi Sue and All,


Zhenqiang Li from China Mobile. 


I see the value to allocate SIDs in a centralized way, especially for the SIDs representing network resources as proposed in and


However, I want to know why BGP-LS is chosen to to complete this work, not PCEP or netconf? BGP-LS is mainly used to collect information from network, other than configure network from a controller.


Best Regards,

Zhenqiang Li



From: Susan Hares <> 

Date: 2019-04-18 22:04


Subject: [Idr] draft-wu-idr-bgp-segment-allocation-ext-02.txt [4/18 - 5/2/2019] - 2 week WG adoption call

This begins a 2 week WG Adoption call for draft-wu-idr-bgp-segment-allocation-ext-02.txt.  You can access the draft at:


In your comments, consider: 


1)      Does this draft mechanisms for  extending BGP-LS to provide IDs for allocation provide a beneficial addition to BGP mechanisms for segment routing? 

2)      Is the mechanism well-formed enough to adopted as a WG draft?   

3)      Do you see any problems with using these IDs for flow redirection? 

4)      Do you support extending BGP-LS? 

5)      Should we provide an early allocation for this technology? 

6)      Do you know of any early implementations? 


By answering these questions during WG Adoption call, you will help John and I determine what issues need to be considered prior to finalizing this WG draft.    Your answer will help us increase the speed of processing BGP-LS drafts.   


If enough people indicate that they wish an early allocation upon adoption, I will then send this early allocation to Alvaro.  


Sue Hares 


PS – I’m trying new methods of WG adoption calls to help speed up the process in IDR WG.   Please send any thoughts on these new methods to me or John.