Dear draft-ietf-spring-srv6-path-segment authors, I have read draft-ietf-spring-srv6-path-segment and noticed that a operational considerations section is missing in your document. Please take https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis as guidance and consider draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment as free gift to include.
Happy to see such work progressing and covering an important aspect on segment routing visibility. Best wishes Thomas From: Graf Thomas, SCS-INI-NET-VNC-E2E Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2025 7:32 AM To: opsawg-chairs <opsawg-cha...@ietf.org>; draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment.auth...@ietf.org Cc: ops...@ietf.org Subject: RE: [OPSAWG]CALL FOR ADOPTION: Export of SRv6 Path Segment Identifier Information in IPFIX,draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment-03 Dear opsawg, draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment authors, I support the document adoption. The document covers a very important aspect, segment routing flow visibility in network observability. It is important that OPSAWG takes on this work. Speaking as a network engineer at a network operator. When performing lab validation of RFC 9487 across different SRv6 implementations, exactly as described in this document, challenges in flow identification due to reduced SRH or compress SID occurred. SR policy identification was under certain circumstances difficult. This makes closed loop operated networks where a segment routing controller steers traffic a challenge. I am more than happy to see that not only the IETF defined with RFC 9545 and draft-ietf-spring-srv6-path-segment defined a path sid identity but with this document enables IPFIX flow visibility. I suggest to expand the scope of the document also to MPLS-SR as described in my document review docx: https://github.com/network-analytics/ietf-network-analytics-document-status/blob/main/document-review/draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment-03.docx pdf: https://github.com/network-analytics/ietf-network-analytics-document-status/blob/main/document-review/draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment-03.pdf Best wishes Thomas From: ben...@everything-ops.net<mailto:ben...@everything-ops.net> <ben...@everything-ops.net<mailto:ben...@everything-ops.net>> Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2025 8:00 AM To: ops...@ietf.org<mailto:ops...@ietf.org> Subject: [OPSAWG]CALL FOR ADOPTION: Export of SRv6 Path Segment Identifier Information in IPFIX,draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment-03 Be aware: This is an external email. Dear all, The IPR poll has concluded (no known IPR has been disclosed), and we would like to start a two weeks adoption poll for draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment-03<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-opsawg-ipfix-path-segment/>. Please respond on-list with support and especially comments. >From the IETF 123 meeting >minutes<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-123-opsawg-202507241500/>, we >can observe the following poll results: Poll: who thinks this is interesting work to adopt? yes: 10, no: 0, no opinion: 11 Getting the authors support is kind of obvious (at least we hope), so non authors feedback is really welcome. The adoption call will run till Sept 18th. Regards, Joe and Benoit
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- spring@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to spring-le...@ietf.org
