[Idr] Re: Concluded: WG Adoption call for draft-hegdearavind-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-ext, ends 31 October, 2025.

[Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>]

Ketan,


> On Nov 10, 2025, at 1:07 PM, Ketan Talaulikar <[e-mail]> wrote:
> This document started as a "catch-up" for BGP-LS encoding for the more recent FlexAlgo IGP extensions as indicated by Aravind.
> 
> Now, more extensions are coming up and ideally the BGP-LS encodings could be covered in those LSR WG documents with some relatively small text updates to avoid the need for separate BGP-LS documents in IDR. This is not always the case, but probably is for these 2 newer documents that Aravind identifies. Personally, this would be my preference.
> 
> On the other side, it is up to the IDR WG to choose between "closing" this document quickly or waiting until some smallish finite time to cover other LSR FlexAlgo related specs. I would request the IDR chairs to weigh in.

By somewhat analogous comparison, the rib-stats document in GROW for BMP started with one particular set of stats.  There's been motivation to add the next set of related stats incrementally.

That document needs to hit RFC at some point.  Same thing here.

And thus the question: If it's catch-up, what's the trajectory?  Do the documents share fate enough that bundling must be done? Should be done?  Ship one because 3/5 of the extensions can go quickly and the next two may take... 6 months?  Two years?

The goal is neither to block the work, nor to stretch the length of life of the document as an I-D rather than as an RFC.  If the work flows better as one document - fine. Shipping another doc with the additional encodings for the two new drafts later - also fine if that makes sense.

And that said, the scope has crept and didn't even make it past -00 before that happened.  Thus the questions. :-)

-- Jeff