Hi Dan, Thanks for your review. Please check inline below for responses. On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 4:24 PM Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review result: Ready with Issues > > 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-idr-sr-policy-safi-09 > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review Date: 2024-11-06 > IETF LC End Date: 2024-11-11 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: > > This document specifies how BGP may be used to distribute SR Policy candidate > paths. It introduces a BGP SAFI to advertise a candidate path of a SR Policy > and defines sub-TLVs for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute for signaling > information about these candidate paths.It updates RFC9012. > > This document is Ready with two Minor Issues. > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > 1. Section 6.10 includes: > > > Note to IANA (RFC editor to remove this before publication): The new > registry creation request below is also present in the draft-ietf- > pce-segment-routing-policy-cp. IANA is requested to process the > registry creation via the first of these two documents to reach > publication stage and the authors of the other document would update > the IANA considerations suitably. > > As I understand, if this document reaches publication before > draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp, Section 6.6 of the latest will be > removed, and the opposite. However, the tables are not identical. In Table 10, > Section 6.10 in this document values 5-255 are Unassigned, while in Section 6.6 > of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp values 5-255 are Reserved. KT> We say "... and the authors of the other document would *update* the IANA considerations suitably." - so we won't be removing section 6.6 of this document. We'll do what is correct/needful under guidance from the IANA team. If there is a different/better way to deal with such "race conditions", we are open to adapt. > > 2.The Manageability Considerations section refers to > [I-D.ietf-spring-sr-policy-yang] which is Expired. KT> The authors of that document were reminded by the SPRING WG chairs earlier this week. That document is a milestone deliverable for SPRING WG and the expectation is that it will progress (soon). Thanks, Ketan > > Nits/editorial comments: > > > -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
