IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Adoption Call for draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05 (10/20 to 11/6/2023)

"duzongpeng@foxmail.com" <duzongpeng@foxmail.com> Thu, 02 November 2023 09:49 UTC

Return-Path: <duzongpeng@foxmail.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FCA4C1522D3 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 02:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.158
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.158 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=foxmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SrENve_cShEo for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 02:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out162-62-57-137.mail.qq.com (out162-62-57-137.mail.qq.com [162.62.57.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52BD5C151717 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 02:49:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=foxmail.com; s=s201512; t=1698918531; bh=JAK385oBlADqRMTaC1IuY/0LcbfYgU8UMMVF1ImdXtU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References; b=KL/mgsyr4TUKBDzB/ffzemX2Mecp0/d8eJHf+FUEkvY5xpnk54ObAnQezSjOUErZR 464pU6fFe3pcZcK5dEBvqYsm9TczeJyvCRtUYI3R5nPG3Cb+EFXcvHeuXJEwecpLYO 4CQzrrHtS28ukOeKkGniRcE0j3avv30T2++VclRw=
Received: from cmcc-PC ([103.35.105.44]) by newxmesmtplogicsvrsza10-0.qq.com (NewEsmtp) with SMTP id C3206286; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 17:48:50 +0800
X-QQ-mid: xmsmtpt1698918530tlxmeupio
Message-ID: <tencent_D960D84DF87CDADAD5A4A3F6CB21A0927C09@qq.com>
X-QQ-XMAILINFO: OW4JKxETGMY2POVH2BUqk6EBFJoofaT2dIAqFEMp6kx2Muak3U76vZa0+ATR9O yxD3rAet7YIeRsI8zjcVr0iLyKQDfNOT1dn57TFww8aYxKzfTAIn93pHtlJPiC5aWaZxq2HIgqCu r4I8fmADDg0Ro0ufD021qNTZ9LiR7k9u9jpX3lP07IuMb7FZETvLmEyfW0q/6n5T8mbytqWtLVoN PN0faTukUmoEcu3y4sBsbzrNYyRkaHOOU3nHkZCkNa9ytt2gpOHw1UUvZPe/StHKLYUZsZWzQG6C UdiQNKSgGgR+ZPKRI3lSs8lymnv0nFapFZ6cB2ntTp/6j3xaVr0jNcMJ2g9zTzhBySEDhNPDX9Wp 5HVNN8z3Fod/TI3GfKY1ia4QZsWKI6/2WCyMCglMwX1bFaakrhobCaWqjndZBhBqQ1D+lHBCW+VO l4FO3oOSl3rqrJh/3tVdj15D5+Ww8QHkY9jVZZWICSehkpQ3jm0H94TvzK377ebOr7UhCc8WnHHQ A0EmwpUrbotF9By1txdh7sPqi+ImyX72ot5dR0kIllCEdRP7hECl3yrCSeYGxB5xO6zrWcV/tmGj kJrRj92R8jEXUA9FSFsb8ttuwPovicGV5TDMPWTiFA1MPKuzukYZb+kyzEvkk2eENneJv8aJzHbg iiwvuGiHJDSDMu46iGw7CnOvYzivLZsmzP98o2KkVyKAU+fqYur9Lftz04RYZRygpRbOdWdIN5wu mbfcsyQlGk/WP/ryQiRry5WBV40Cxj1sJInixNk2V86mi2dvc/uNB+yVHW+/r4JokshDD3AGh8dH Xh29fpuWWRy21shs7NY1BNHo5mc8qYJCcfXPS/Piamr4lycQL4fT+00sx/2oTMP0UV/LYPFcpmdW Ka2oGmIngNs5elicw5Fw1NOLMUjqWR2XD55By5a/axQ75iyJBXYo9myCoMZksCjrmI7vwNbepczo q8mhJLx3iV32/6n5Cbemwcs/aT+9BoarDdLTke1wLiX74asw0uNzevHXfDySyRQqtUwuAFi5eWI1 VtVdRxz3w566I/NgiE
X-QQ-XMRINFO: Nq+8W0+stu50PRdwbJxPCL0=
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 17:48:49 +0800
From: "duzongpeng@foxmail.com" <duzongpeng@foxmail.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Cc: org <idr@ietf.org>
References: <BYAPR08MB4872A7276F17700F768D21CBB3DBA@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
X-Priority: 3
X-GUID: 8F7CE5CB-4B1E-45F0-8F70-95EAF0E2B87A
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.2.25.178[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-OQ-MSGID: <202311021748491413046@foxmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart327547222324_=----"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/ozoeP7uZqbx4AmVSR-KsaGDgyIQ>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption Call for draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05 (10/20 to 11/6/2023)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 09:49:07 -0000

Hi Sue,
 
    I support the adoption of this document. It provides necessary information for selecting the best SR policy.
 
Here are the answers to the questions:
 
1.      Yes
2.      Yes
3.      Yes

Best Regards
Zongpeng Du



duzongpeng@foxmail.com & duzongpeng@chinamobile.com 
 
From: Susan Hares
Date: 2023-10-21 01:49
To: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] Adoption Call for draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05 (10/20 to 11/6/2023)
This begins a 2-week WG adoption call for draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05.txt. 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-metric-05
 
The authors of this draft (Ka Zhang, Jie Dong, and Ketan Talaulikar) should respond to this email
And indicate whether they know of any IPR related to this draft. 
 
This draft proposes adding a “metric” field for each segment list for  
SR Policy candidate paths in addition to the existing “weight field” 
described by the tunnel attribute for the SR Policy tunnel type: 
 
              Tunnel Type: SR Policy
                 Binding SID
                 Preference
                 Priority
                 Policy Name
                 Policy Candidate Path Name
                 Explicit NULL Label Policy (ENLP)
                 Segment List
                     Weight
                     Metric
                     Segment
                     Segment
 
 
As you discuss adopting this draft, consider:
 
Do the segment lists need both a weight and a metric? 
Does this draft provide clear instructions on how to process a segment list that has both weight and metric? 
Is this feature needed for SR Policy Candidate routes? 
 
Cheerily, Sue

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email