[spring] Re: WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt (5/10/2026 to 5/31/2026)

[linchangwang <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jie, Sue,


Thank you for your valuable feedback.



I have now updated version-10.



Link: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09&url2=draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-10&difftype=--html





Pls check and let us know if there are any further comments.


Thanks,
Changwang

发件人: Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong=[e-mail]>
发送时间: 2026年5月21日 16:53
收件人: Susan Hares <[e-mail]>; idr@ietf. org <[e-mail]>; spring <[e-mail]>; Path Computation Element Discussion List <[e-mail]>
主题: [Pce] Re: WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt (5/10/2026 to 5/31/2026)


Hi Sue,

Thanks for your response. I agree the appendix with cross-WG information is useful for the process of the document.

My comment was to make the appendix text concise and relevant. I hope this is easy to fix for the authors.

Best regards,
Jie

From: Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2026 10:53 PM
To: Dongjie (Jimmy) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; idr@ietf. org <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; spring <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Path Computation Element Discussion List <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: RE: WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt (5/10/2026 to 5/31/2026)

Jie:

Appendix A will be removed prior to publication.  The purpose of this appendix is to provide the IDR WG, Directorates, and IESG with background on the cross-WG issues.   This is a new process to hopefully avoid the cross-WG issues that delayed other BGP SR TE drafts (e.g. draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp).

I agree that appendix A.1 is repetitive to the main text.  The authors may wish to consider what information the IESG needs in addition to the main text.

I agree that section A.3 should be change before going to the IESG.

Current text:/
A.3.  SRv6OPS

   This document is unrelated to SRv6OPS and only relates to BGP-TE
   extensions.

   [RFC9857] defines an optional sub-TLV (called SR Segment List
   Identifier sub-TLV) used to report an identifier associated with the
   specific SID list via BGP-LS.  This sub-TLV is carried in the
   optional non-transitive BGP-LS Attribute defined in [RFC9552] and are
   associated with the SR Policy Candidate Path NLRI type.
/

New text:/
A.3.  SRv6OPS

   This document is unrelated to SRv6OPS and only relates to BGP-TE
   extensions.
/

Thank you for your input,
Cheerily - Sue



From: Dongjie (Jimmy) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2026 6:27 AM
To: Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; idr@ietf. org <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; spring <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Path Computation Element Discussion List <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: RE: WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt (5/10/2026 to 5/31/2026)

Hi Sue, WG, After the discussion with the authors and WG members about the relationship between candidate path and segment lists in SR Policy architecture on the SPRING list, I agree it is suitable to have the segment list ID scoped under the

Hi Sue, WG,

After the discussion with the authors and WG members about the relationship between candidate path and segment lists in SR Policy architecture on the SPRING list, I agree it is suitable to have the segment list ID scoped under the candidate path hierarchy. This is also consistent with the specification of segment list ID in BGP-LS and PCEP extensions.  Thus I support progressing this document.

I have one comment about the newly added appendix. The text in appendix A.1 has much overlap with the text in the introduction, and is not about the related work in SPRING WG. It is suggested to clear up the text and focus on the work or discussion in SPRING WG related to this draft. Similarly, the text in appendix A.3 about RFC 9857 is not related to SRv6OPS.

Best regards,
Jie

From: Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2026 3:47 AM
To: idr@ietf. org <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; spring <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Path Computation Element Discussion List <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [Pce] WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt (5/10/2026 to 5/31/2026)

Greetings:

This is a 3-week WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt (5/10/2026 to 5/31/2026).  The authors of draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-09.txt should respond to this email with IPR statements.

This IDR WG LC is being cross-posted to Spring, PCE, and SRv6ops.  This document’s WG LC needs input from these 3 WGs.

IDR WG members should discuss this draft and include in their discussion an indication of “support” or “no Support”.   IDR members should consider the following:
1) Is this document ready for publication?
2) Does the segment list identifier specified at the candidate path (CP) scope help deployments?
3) Are there any technical flaws in this document?

Appendix A of this draft contains a “cross-WG” information regarding Spring and PCE.   This WG LC includes Spring and PCE to validate the cross-WG information.  In addition, SRV6ops will be informed of the WG LC.

This draft limits the scope of the segment list identifier to a candidate path.  During January – March,  the spring WG discussed whether this should be limited to just the Candidate Path or whether the scope of Segment List ID as unique within the headend node.  The discussion is at:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/JVzsniFIj3sSQ93HT4Sl4fbJDpE/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailarchive.ietf.org_arch_msg_spring_JVzsniFIj3sSQ93HT4Sl4fbJDpE_&d=DwMFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=3QxUPy-fV0G16Z4tIRByiA&m=EbdRkbs2KtH8Xpwn0HfLr2uN1Hb8Y6z3k3u6qVzKb5oo5pfIc0O-1oAMcSIeHnfR&s=CspAgbuqbo5ENfclh-32puYrZfCJ2pTfrfs5zXrj698&e=>

Spring WG – please review the author's decision to limit the BGP mechanism to a candidate path.  Does this limitation align with Spring’s view on the segment list identifier?

PCE WG -  please check that the reference material related to draft-ietf-pce-multipath are correct and valid.

Thank you, Susan Hares

PS – the SRv6ops is an operational WG – so I will send notification and summarize results.







-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
本邮件及其附件含有新华三集团的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或群组。
禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、或散发）本邮件中的信息。
如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件！
This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from New H3C, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above.
Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited.
If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!