First IDR Session: July 24, 2023

13:00-15:00 (GMT-7) Monday session II

Room: Plaza B

0. Agenda bashing and Chairs' Slides (5 mins)

[Chairs] WG LCs on CAR/CT will be extended to the end of IETF week.

1. BGP Classful Transport Planes (5 mins)

[Reshma Das]

Ketan: A detailed review has been sent to the mailing list. One specific
point is how to deal with the reference to the individual drafts.

Swadesh: Still waiting for feedbacks to some comments on the protocol

Reshama: Will take it to the list.

2. BGP Color-Aware Routing (CAR) (5 mins)


Keyur: (As WG member), Arrcus has an implementation of BGP CAR, has
finished interop test successfully.

Kaliraj: For SRv6 you can just use BGP-LU. So many options in CAR. Color
vs no-color, LCM EC vs Color EC. Better to have a common way

Swadesh: CAR defines a new SAFI just for the transport purpose. It can
support migration among multiple encapsulations. BGP-LU has been used
for both transport and service.

Susan: Please take that question offline.

Keyur: (As WG member), interoperability has been shown at the EANTC.
Overloading BGP-LU is bad choice. BGP-LU uses the global table, for
intent different tables may be used.

3. BGP Colorful Prefix Routing (CPR) for SRv6 based Services (5 mins)

[Jie Dong] Jeff: Remind that the CPR draft is informational.

4. Discussion on Route with Color (5 mins)

Andrew: A general comment on inter-domain. SRv6 is for limited domain.
Using it for inter-domain would be a violation.

Susan: Will add that to the set of things to check.

Ketan: A general design question. The use case is for multiple domains
under the same administration. In inter-AS option C, the service layer
color needs to be consistent. Then should the transport layer color also
be consistent?

Susan: Please send the question to the list.

Kaliraj: CT provides a way for the heterogeneous case.

5. BGP MultiNexthop Attribute (5 mins)

[Kaliraj Vairavakkalai]

Jeff: No time for comments. Please take them to the list.

6. SRv6 Segment List Optimization (10 mins)

[Changwang Lin/Yisong Liu]

No comments.

7. One Administrative Domain using BGP (10 mins)

[Alvaro Retana/Keyur Patel]

Sue: Some of this comes from the previous confederation design. There is
something we do need to solve. There are problems if you don't insert
some sort of marker...Will discuss it further.

Keyur: Will note the historical lessons.

8. BGP Extension for 5G Edge Service Metadata (5 mins)

[Linda Dunbar]

No time for comments.

9. BGP Dissemination of FlowSpec for Transport Aware Mobility (5 mins)

[Linda Dunbar]

Sue: To authors of Flowspec related drafts, please take a look at the
flowspecV2 draft and provide comments. Implementation of FlowspecV2 will
begin shortly.

10. SRv6-based BGP Service Capability (10 mins)

[Yao Liu]

No comments.

11. BGP Extensions of SR Policy for Segment List Protection (5 mins)

[Yao Liu]

Ketan: Within a candidate path, all segment lists are for load balancing
purpose only. This violates the SR policy architecture.

[Ketan Talaulikar]

?: Why adding all of this into attributes instead of NLRI?

Ketan: This version only adds PCE identifications, don't want to inrease
the amount of BGP routes for this.

13. Validity of SR Policy Candidate Path (5 mins)

[Ran Chen]

No comments.

14. BGP over QUIC (15 mins)

[Jeff Haas]

Keyur: As SIDROPS co-chair, suggest to present it in SIDR due to the
security implications.

Jeff: There is no control protocol in IETF making use of Quic yet, this
may have broader IETF impact.

Linda: How is it different from BGP multi-session?

Jeff: BGP multi-session does not share fate or coordinate among multiple
sessions. The connections in quic are coordinated.

Sue: Be aware of the considerations about BGP error handling.

David Lamparter: Concern about the word prioritization. Better to call
it serilization.

Jeff: It is about both the sender and the receiver realization.

Andrew: no hat on. Plus 1 on the TLS considerations. It is important for

Zheng Zhang: It is a new idea and may have some challenges, with Quick
BGP session may not expire any more thanks to the control channel. What
if the control channel works fine, while there is congestion in the
update channel?

Jeff: this is about the prioritization discussion. Something like send
holdtimer needs to be discussed. There is active discussion about

Tony P: Some information about the channels are not quite accurate.
Keepalive goes on the F channels.

15. MP-BGP Extension and the Procedures for IPv4/IPv6 Mapping Advertisement (10 mins)

[Chongfeng Xie]

No comments.

16. Connecting IPv4 Islands over IPv6 Core using IPv4 Provider Edge Routers (4PE) (5 mins)

[Gyan Mishra]

No comments.

Speaker Shuffling Time/Buffer: 5 minutes
Total Time: 120 minutes


Second IDR Session: July 25, 2023

17:00-18:00 (GMT-7) Tuesday Session IV

Room: Plaza A

0. Agenda bashing and Chairs' Slides (3 mins)


1. BGP Flow Specification for DetNet and TSN Flow Mapping (10 mins)

[Quan Xiong]

No comments.

2. The Secondary Label and its applications (10 mins)

[Satya Mohanty]

Keyur: Suggest to use the same attribute instead of different ones.
Would be great to use existing attributes. The question is can the
problem be solved by not using that label allocation mode?

Satya: This would happen with this particular label allocation mode.

Keyur: My suggestion is don't use that allocation method.

3. The extensions of BGP-LS to carry security capabilities (10 mins)

[Meiling Chen]

Jeff Haas: This use case is useful. For new attributes types, please use
TBD before it is assigned by IANA.

4. BGP Attribute Escape (10 mins)

[Jeff Haas]

No time for comments.

5. Source Address Validation (SAVNET) Architecture (15 mins)

[Nan Geng]

No time for comments.

Speaker Shuffling Time/Buffer: 2 minutes
Total Time: 60 minutes