Dear Susan and WG,
I support the adoption of these three drafts. These drafts together address a complete and practical optimization need for SRv6 Policy deployment. The administrative flags framework defined in draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flags provides a foundational extension for managing the operational state of candidate paths and segment lists. Building on that, draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimize introduces the IFN-flag to enable SID list optimization by excluding the endpoint node SID when appropriate, which improves forwarding efficiency and reduces packet header overhead. Finally, draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution extends this capability to BGP-LS, allowing network controllers and external components to obtain this optimization information for better visibility and orchestration. I think these drafts are technically sound, follow a clean layered design. Relevant responses are as follows: Questions for SPRING WG: 1) Do these drafts correct implement [draft-ietf-spring-srv6-policy-sid-list-opt] concepts? --Yes 2) Do you see any problem with the adoption of any of these three drafts: (draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flag-05.txt, draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimize-06.txt, draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution-00.txt) --No Question for IDR: 1) Are there any problems in the technology descriptions? --No 2) Does the status and setting of this flag work? --Yes Are the “delays” inherent in BGP distribution a concern? --No 3) Does this draft help operators deploy SRv6? --Yes Question for Spring and IDR: 1) Does this draft open any error issues? --No Best Regards, Liyan ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Susan Hares" <[email protected]>Date: 2026-06-24 00:46:20To: "idr@ietf. org" <[email protected]>,spring <[email protected]>Cc: "Jeffrey Haas" <[email protected]>,pce-chairs <[email protected]>,srv6ops-chairs <[email protected]>Subject: [spring] [SR-TE]Adoption call for 3 drafts: 1) draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flags, 2) draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimize, 3) draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution-00.txt (6/22/2026 to 7/14/2026 Greetings: This is an adoption 3 week WG adoption call sent to IDR and Spring for the following 3 drafts: 1. draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flag-05.txt – 2. draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimize-06.txt 3. draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution-00.txt Both WGs must agree that these drafts are useful and appropriate. The authors of these three drafts should respond to this email with an IPR Statement specifying the following: 1) draft you are a co-author on, 2) Whether you know of any IPR on that draft. Background for the WG and Spring. [I-D. draft-ietf-spring-srv6-policy-sid- list-opt] specifies procedures to indicate whether the endpoint39s node SID needs to be included or excluded when installing the SRv6 Policy. 1) draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flags specifies as Segment List Administrative Flags as segment list SubTLV. Flags include: S- admin shutdown, B- backup ineligible, I-Ignore service route39s Prefix SID, D- drop upon invalid (section 8.2, RFC9256), and E – eligible. 2) draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimize = adds a flag of flag INF-Flag to Segment list administrative flags specified by draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flags. The value (1) for INF-Flags indicates endpoint node SID is included in installing SID list(s) of the Candidate Path (CP) when set. 3) draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution-00.txt - send INF-Flag in BGP-LS Why 3 drafts in 1 call? As you can see from the description, if draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flags is not adopted – then the other two drafts cannot be adopted. Similarly, if draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimized is not adopted, then draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution cannot be adopted. Questions for Spring WG: 1) Do these drafts correct implement [draft-ietf-spring-srv6-policy-sid-list-opt] concepts?> 2) Do you see any problem with the adoption of any of these three drafts: (draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-admin-flag-05.txt, draft-liu-idr-sr-segment-list-optimize-06.txt, draft-ali-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-sl-opt-distribution-00.txt) Question for IDR: 1) Are there any problems in the technology descriptions? 2) Does the status and setting of this flag work? Are the “delays” inherent in BGP distribution a concern? 3) Does this draft help operators deploy SRv6? Question for Spring and IDR: 1) Does this draft open any error issues? Please include in your comments – Support or No support for adoption. Cheerily, Susan Hares
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
