[Pce] Re: [Gen-art] draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-29 ietf last call Genart review

[Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]>]

Hi Gyan,

I am the Document Shepherd. Thanks for your review.

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 2:19 AM Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Dear authors
>
> My initial review state was Almost ready but then I
>
> changed my mind to ready and forgot to update the
>
>
> stare selection to ready.
>
>
> *There was one topic I was curious about as this draft was being
> developed.*
>
>
> *This draft updates PCEP extension to support flex algo but also extends
> the Flex algo RFC 9350 at the same time.  *
>
>
> *I think the draft should only focus on the PCEP extension for flex algo
> and not on updating Flex algo RFC 9350.*
>
>
> *Although the draft does not state that it is updating RFC 9350, Section
> 4.5 extension to metric object Provides new FAD metric constraints for the
> metric object that it says can be used for flex algo or any path setup even
> maybe SR policy. *
>
>
>
Dhruv: This sentence

> “While these new metric types are defined to support this specific use
> case, their use is not restricted to Flexible Algorithm path computation or
> to any specific Path Setup Type.”

simply clarifies that the new PCEP METRIC types defined here are *not
limited* to Flex-Algo use cases in PCEP. That means the same metric types
could be reused in other contexts (e.g., RSVP-TE path computation by PCE).
This does not change the Flex-Algo definition itself or update RFC 9350.


> *Also the draft mentions section 5.2 and extending 0-127 future use algo
> to be used for SR Algo as long as not requiring an explicit extension
> beyond Sr Algo.  *
>

Dhruv: I am not fully sure what you mean. But section 5.2 only restates and
aligns with the existing algorithm number space defined in RFC 8402 and RFC
9350 — it does not extend or redefine it. Values 0–127 and 128–255 follows
the IGP specifications. PCEP merely signals them, note that there is no new
registry here.

Thanks!
Dhruv



>
> *I think maybe both of these topics belong in a different Flex Algo spec
> that updates RFC 9350.*
>
> Thanks
>
> Gyan
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 4:24 PM Gyan Mishra via Datatracker <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Document: draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo
>> Title: Carrying SR-Algorithm in Path Computation Element Communication
>> Protocol
>> (PCEP) Reviewer: Gyan Mishra Review result: Almost Ready
>>
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>> like any other last call comments.
>>
>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>
>> <https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.
>>
>> Document: draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-??
>> Reviewer: Gyan Mishra
>> Review Date: 2025-10-22
>> IETF LC End Date: 2025-09-25
>> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>>
>> Summary:
>>
>> This document specifies extensions to the Path Computation Element
>> Communication Protocol (PCEP) to enhance support for Segment Routing (SR)
>> with
>> a focus on the use of Segment Identifiers (SIDs) and SR-Algorithms in
>> Traffic
>> Engineering (TE). The SR-Algorithm associated with a SID defines the path
>> computation algorithm used by Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs). It
>> introduces
>> mechanisms for PCEP peers to signal SR-Algorithm associated with SIDs by
>> encoding this information in Explicit Route Object (ERO) and Record Route
>> Object (RRO) subobjects, enables SR-Algorithm constraints for path
>> computation,
>> and defines new metric types for the METRIC object. This document updates
>> RFC
>> 8664 and RFC 9603 to allow such extensions.
>>
>> I reviewed the draft and have been following the draft for the last few
>> years
>> and it is stable and ready for publication.
>>
>> Major issues:
>>
>> None
>>
>> Minor issues:
>>
>> None
>>
>> Nits/editorial comments:
>>
>> None
>>
>> None
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gen-art mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
>