Hi Linda,
Thank you very much for your thorough review and comments.
Please see my comments in-line.

B.R.
Weiqiang

 
From: Linda Dunbar
Date: 2025-09-04 07:22
To: spring; [email protected]
Subject: [spring] Re: WG Last Call: 
draft-ietf-spring-dhc-distribute-srv6-locator-dhcp-09 (Ends 2025-09-11)
I support the WGLC with the following comments: 
 
Section 5.2 allows clients to request multiple IA_SRV6_LOCATOR options; Section 
5.3 says server policy decides. To avoid interoperability divergence, consider 
recommending a default (e.g., “SHOULD assign a single locator unless explicitly 
configured”)

[WQ] Agree. We will update it in the new version.
 
Section 5.4 requires relay agents to generate SRv6 locator routes locally. is 
this mandatory, or only when relay also serves as BRAS?

[WQ] Yes. We will add some more text to clarify it. 

Privacy section assumes a “trusted SR domain”; suggest clarifying implications 
if CPEs/BRAS cross administrative boundaries (who owns locator assignment?)

[WQ] To stay aligned with the SR architecture, all CPE and BRAS instances in 
this document are placed within the“Trusted domain.” More precisely, DHCP will 
be used only for network elements that belong to the same administrative 
domain. We will add a clarification to the next release.

Nits / Editorial:
[WQ] Agreed. We will update them accordingly.
 
Sometimes “IA_LOCATOR” is used instead of “IA_SRV6_LOCATOR”. Recommend 
consistent use.
 
LOC-Len definition: Section 4.2 implies LOC-Len = LB-Len + LN-Len, but never 
introduces “LOC-Len” explicitly. Worth defining clearly.
 
Section 4.2 — “must be discarded” ->  should use normative “MUST discard” per 
RFC 8174 language.
 
Section 5.3: “The IA_SRV6_LOCATOR option fills with…” ->  better phrased as “is 
filled with”.
 
Section 6.1: “implementation of implementation of” -> duplicate words, should 
be “implementation of”.
 
Wards, Linda
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This message starts a 2-week WG Last Call for this document.
 
Abstract:
   In an SRv6 network, each SRv6 Segment Endpoint Node must be assigned
   an SRv6 locator, and segment IDs are generated within the address
   space of this SRv6 locator.  This document describes a method for
   assigning SRv6 locators to SRv6 Segment Endpoint Nodes through
   DHCPv6.
 
File can be retrieved from:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-dhc-distribute-srv6-locator-dhcp/
 
Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
publication of this document by replying to this email keeping
[email protected] in copy. Objections should be motivated and suggestions to
resolve them are highly appreciated.
 
Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded again of the
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79
[1]. Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of
any. Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can
be found at [3].
 
Thank you.
 
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
 
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to