Shepherd's Report- G4 Issues (Appendix Editorial) 1-30

[suehares]

G4 Appendix Editorial Issues

G4-1: Appendix A.1, A.2, A.3.1, A.3.2, A.6,

status: Your choice, but Problem G4-1a: Please use complete English sentences. Problem G4-1b: Using a period at the end of each item in a list is ok. The RFC editor usually allows periods in a list.
Problem G4-1c: Introduce your list clearly. One example of an appropriate list introduction is the following:
-06 text: / With reference to the topology above:/ New text:/ With reference to the topology above, the following occurs:/

Problem G4-2: In A.6

Old Text: / With reference to the Figure 6/ New text: / With reference to /Figure 6, the following occurs:/

G-3. A.1 - Missing period.

Old text:/IGP FA 128 is running in each domain, and mapped to Color C1/ New text:/IGP FA 128 is running in each domain, and mapped to Color C1./

G4-4 in A.2

Why: Sentence Grammar (verb alignment and punctuation). Note: Changes indicated in bold in the new text. Old text/

• With reference to the topology above:
  • SR Policy provide intra domain intent. Below are example SID lists of SR policies in each domain corresponding to label stack in Figure 7: o SR policy (C1,121) segments <S1, 121> o SR policy (C1,231) segments <S2, 231> o SR policy (C1,E2) segments <S3, E2> / New text:/
• With reference to the topology above:
  • An SR Policy provides intra-domain intent. The examples of SID lists of SR policies in each domain corresponding to a label stack in Figure 7: o SR policy (C1,121) segments <S1, 121>, o SR policy (C1,231) segments <S2, 231>, and o SR policy (C1,E2) segments <S3, E2>. /

G4-5: Missing article and space in A.2

Note: Changed text is bolded in the new text to aid the reader of problem report. Please remove bold before adding to text. Old Text:/

• On each BGP hop, CAR route (E2, C1) next hop is resolved over an SR policy(C1, next hop). New text:/
  • On each BGP hop, the CAR route (E2, C1) next hop is resolved over an SR policy (C1, next hop)./

G4-6: Section A.4

What: replace ";" with ","** and edits for clear sentences. Note: I've put the changes in bold to make these easier to read. Please remove the bold before inserting in the text. -07 text:/

• In a brownfield deployment, color-aware paths between two PEs may need to go through a transit domain that does not support CAR. Examples include an MPLS LDP network with IGP best-effort; or a BGP-LU based multi-domain network. MPLS LDP network with best effort IGP can adopt above scheme. Below is the example for BGP LU./ New text:/ In a brownfield deployment, color-aware paths between two PEs may need to go through a transit domain that does not support CAR. Examples of such a brownfield network are an MPLS LDP network with IGP best-effort, or a BGP-LU based multi-domain network. An MPLS LDP network with best effort IGP can adopt the above scheme in section A.3. Below is the example scenario for BGP LU./

G4-7: Section A.5 - Sentence form needs commands + added text.

Old text:/

• C1 and C2 represent two unique intents in multi-domain network
  • C1 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric"
  • C2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric and avoid resource R" / New text:/
• C1 and C2 represent the following two unique intents in multi-domain network
  • C1 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric", and
  • C2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric and avoid resource R". /

G4-8: Section A.5 - Sentence needs a period.

Each of the sentences below needs a period. Old text:

• Resource R represents link(s) or node(s) to be avoided

• Flex-Algo FA128 in Domain 2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric" and hence to C1

• Flex-Algo FA129 in Domain 2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric and avoid resource R" and hence to C2

• Flex-Algo FA128 in Domain 1 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric"

  • There is no resource R to be avoided in Domain 1, hence both C1 and C2 are mapped to FA128 /

G4-9: Section A.5 - sentence needs command + added text.

Old text:/

• E1 receives two service routes from E2:

  • V/v with BGP Color Extended-Community C1
  • W/w with BGP Color Extended-Community C2

• E1 has the following color-aware paths:

  • (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution: o Domain1: over IGP FA128 o Domain2: over IGP FA128
  • (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution: o Domain1: over IGP FA128 o Domain2: over IGP FA129, avoiding resource R

• E1 automatically steers the received service routes as follows:

  • V/v via (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR
  • W/w via (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR / New text:/

• E1 receives the following two service routes from E2:

  • V/v with BGP Color Extended-Community C1, and
  • W/w with BGP Color Extended-Community C2.

• E1 has the following color-aware paths:

  • (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution:

    o Domain1: over IGP FA128, and o Domain2: over IGP FA128.

  • (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution: o Domain1: over IGP FA128, and o Domain2: over IGP FA129 (avoiding resource R).

• E1 automatically steers the received service routes as follows:

  • V/v via (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR, and
  • W/w via (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR. /

G4-10 Section A.7 - Missing periods

07-text:/

• Both E2 (in egress domain 2) and E3 (in egress domain 3) advertise Anycast (shared) IP (IP1, C1) with same label L1 / New-text:/
• Both E2 (in egress domain 2) and E3 (in egress domain 3) advertise Anycast (shared) IP (IP1, C1) with same label L1./

G4-11: Section A.7 - use active tense in sentence

Old text:/ If D2 and D3 belonged to different color domains, the domains will coordinate the assignment of colors to be used with shared IP IP1 such that they do not cause conflicts. / New text:/ If D2 and D3 belong to different color domains, the domains will coordinate the assignment of colors with shared IP IP1 so that they do not cause conflicts. /

G4-12, Appendix B, first paragraph

Old text:/There are a variety of deployment scenarios that arise w.r.t different color mappings in an inter-domain environment/.

Why use w.r.t when the word "concerning" works?

G4-13, Appendix B.2, missing commands and spaces

Old text:/

• With reference to the topology above:

  • Core domain provides 4 intra domain intents as described below: o FA128 mapped to C10 o FA129 mapped to C20 o FA130 mapped to C30 o FA131 mapped to C40

  • Access domain provides 2 intra domain intents o FA132 mapped to C1 o FA133 mapped to C2

  • Operator defines 4 BGP CAR end to end intents as below o CAR color C100 that resolves on C1 in access and C10 in core domain o CAR color C200 that resolves on C1 in access and C20 in core domain o CAR color C300 that resolves on C2 in access and C30 in core domain o CAR color C400 that resolves on C2 in access and C40 in core domain / New text - change lists to complete sentences

new text:/ With reference to the topology above, the following occurs o FA128 is mapped to C10, o FA129 is mapped to C20, o FA130 is mapped to C30, and o FA131 is mapped to C40.

  -  Access domain provides 2 intra-domain intents
     o  FA132 is mapped to C1, and
     o  FA133 is mapped to C2. 

  -  Operator defines 4 BGP CAR end-to-end intents as below
     o  CAR color C100 that resolves on C1 in access and C10 in core 
        domain, 
     o  CAR color C200 that resolves on C1 in access and C20 in core
        domain, 
     o  CAR color C300 that resolves on C2 in access and C30 in core
        domain, and 
     o  CAR color C400 that resolves on C2 in access and C40 in core
        domain. /

G4-14: Appendix B.2

Why: Punctuation and Spacing.; Old text: / For example (E2,C100)with BGP color ECs C1, C10 resolves over C1 at ABR 231, C10 at ABR 121 and C1 at E1./ New text:/For example (E2,C100) with BGP color ECs C1, C10 resolves over C1 at ABR 231, C10 at ABR 121, and C1 at E1./

G4-15 Appendix B.3 - Two clauses give a side note (, clause, clause)

Note: changed text is in bold. Old text:/ When the routes are distributed between domains with different color- to-intent mapping schemes, both N:N and N:M cases are possible, although an N:M mapping is more likely to occur. / New text:/ When the routes are distributed between domains with different color- to-intent mapping schemes, both N:N and N:M cases are possible. Although an N:M mapping is more likely to occur. /

G4-16: Appendix B - missing periods at the end of a sentence Note: changes in next text in bold. Remove bold before inserting in document. Old text:/

• A BR in D2 receiving (E, C1) maps C1 in received LCM-EC to local color, say C2 [snip]

  • A BR in D2 may receive (E, C1) from multiple D1 BRs which provide equal cost or primary/backup paths [snip].

• A colored service route V/v originated in color domain D1 with next hop E and color C1 will also have its color extended- community value re-mapped to C2, typically at a service RR

• On an ingress PE in D2, V/v will resolve via C2 / New text:/

• A BR in D2 receiving (E, C1) maps C1 in received LCM-EC to local color, say C2. [snip]

  • A BR in D2 may receive (E, C1) from multiple D1 BRs which provide equal cost or primary/backup paths. [snip].

• A colored service route V/v originated in color domain D1 with next hop E, and color C1 will also have its Color-EC value re-mapped to C2. This remapping will typically occur at a service RR.

• On an ingress PE in D2, V/v will resolve via C2. /

G4-17: Appendix C.1

Please make sure each bullet line has a period. You are missing several periods.

G4-18: Appendix C.2

Please make sure each bullet line has a period. You are missing several periods.

G4-19: Appendix C.3

a) Title - should include the phrases "Non-Routed Service SID"

G4-20: Appendix C.3

Old text:/ IPv6 packet destination B:C21:2:B6:: lookup in mySID table on ABR 231 or 232 results in END.B6 behavior i.e. push of policy segments to E2. / New text:/ IPv6 packet destination B:C21:2:B6:: lookup in mySID table on ABR 231 or 232 results in END.B6 behavior (i.e. push of policy segments to E2)./

G4-21:B Appendix C.3

Please make sure each bullet line has a period. You are missing a few periods.

G4-22: - Use COLOR-EC abbreviation for clarity A.2, A.3.1, A.3.2, B.2

G4-22a: A.2 Old Text:/

• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with (color extended community) C1 to steer traffic to BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. / New text:/
• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with Color-EC C1 to steer traffic to BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. /

G4-22b - A.3.1 Old text:/

• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with (color extended community) C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. / New text:/
• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with Color-EC C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. /

G4-22c - A.3.2

Old text:/

• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with (color extended community) C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1./ New text :/
• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with
  Color-EC C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1./

G4-23 - Flex Algo textual clarity - sections A.3.1

Why: Unclear text. Old Text:/

• Local policy on 231 and 232 maps intent C1 to resolve CAR route next hop over IGP base algo 0 in right access domain. BGP CAR label swap entry is installed that goes over algo 0 LSP to next hop. Update AIGP metric to reflect algo 0 metric to next hop with an additional penalty (+1000). / Change "IGP base algo 0" to "IGP Base flex algo 0". Change "Update" to "Updates" Change "reflect algo 0 metric" to "reflect flex algo 0 metric"

G4-24: Missing figure numbers in A.4 to A

Missing figures: Figure in A.4 - Reference topology should be Figure 10. Packet forwarding diagram at the end of C.1 - would be better as a Figure 16 Packet forwarding diagram at the end of C2 - would be better as Figure 18

Figures: A.4 - Reference topology should be Figure 10. A.5 - Should be figure 11 (currently Figure 10). A.7 - Should be figure 12 (currently Figure 11). B.2 - Should be figure 13 (currently Figure 12). B.3 - Should be figure 14 (not currently a figure) C.1 - Should be Figure 15 (currently figure 13). C1 - Packet forwarding at the end of C.1 Should be figure 16 (not currently a figure).
C2 - Should be Figure 17 (currently figure 14)
C2 - Packet forwarding at end of C2. Should be figure 18 (not currently a figure) D - The Table in D should be Figure 19 or a listed as a Table.

Figures could be improved by showing direction of routes and direction of traffic flow.

G4-26: Text Clarity in A.3.2

Old Text:

• Local policy on 121 and 122 maps intent C1 to resolve CAR route next hop in Core domain over TE tunnels. BGP CAR label swap entry is installed that goes over a TE tunnel to next hop providing intent in Core domain. AIGP metric is updated to reflect TE tunnel metric.
  [snip]
  • Important:
• TE tunnel LSP provides intent in Core domain.
• Dynamic BGP CAR label carries intent from PEs which is realized in core domain by resolution via TE tunnel. /

what to fix: If TE tunnels are RSVP-TE, please change the text to reflect that. If TE Tunnels can be a variety of TE technologies, specify the technologies.

G4-27: in A.6 Clarity on "N" being prefix or Next Hop.

Unclear text: Is "N" - a next hop or a Prefix? (text in bold and italics to help you see it.) Text in A.6: /

• Ingress PE E1 is configured to instantiate an array of paths to E2 where entry 0 is the BGP LU path to N, color C1 is the first entry and color C2 is the second entry. The index into the array is called a Forwarding Class (FC). The index can have values 0 to 7, especially when derived from the MPLS TC bits [RFC5462] /

G4-28: Text Clarity in B.2

Old text: / Each BGP CAR color/ New text: / Each ETE BGP CAR color/

G4-29: Text Clarity in B.3

Old text:/ * The original intent in the BGP CAR route is preserved; i.e. route is (E, C1) / What to fix: Please explain how the original color is preserved. Is it preserved in the NLRI?

G4-30: Appendix D is a theoretical Analysis

Change: Required change. Please note that Appendix D is a theoretical analysis based on normal data. Please adjust your text to complete this information.

[suehares]

No changes were made to Appendices A-D beyond the change to Color-EC.
I've renumbered the issues from the Shepherd's report in G4 Category to G-1 to G30.

None of the G4 Category issues are resolved.

[suehares]

G4-1: Appendix A.1, A.2, A.3.1, A.3.2, A.6,

-08-Status: Resolved G4-1a, G4-1b, G4-1c,

Edit-status: Your choice, but Problem G4-1a: Please use complete English sentences. Problem G4-1b: Using a period at the end of each item in a list is ok. The RFC editor usually allows periods in a list. Problem G4-1c: Introduce your list clearly. One example of an appropriate list introduction is the following: -06 text: / With reference to the topology above:/ New text:/ With reference to the topology above, the following occurs:/

[suehares]

Problem G4-2: In A.6

-09-status: Resolved, closed -08-status: Not resolved. Old Text: / With reference to the Figure 6/ New text: / With reference to Figure 6, the following occurs:/

[suehares]

G-3. A.1 - Missing period.

08-status: Resolved, Closed Old text:/IGP FA 128 is running in each domain, and mapped to Color C1/ New text:/IGP FA 128 is running in each domain, and mapped to Color C1./

[suehares]

G4-4 in A.2

-09-text status: resolved, closed -08-text status: Not resolved.

Why -07 change: Sentence Grammar (verb alignment and punctuation). Note: Changes are indicated in bold in the new text. Old text/

• With reference to the topology above:
  • SR Policy provide intra domain intent. Below are example SID lists of SR policies in each domain corresponding to label stack in Figure 7: o SR policy (C1,121) segments <S1, 121> o SR policy (C1,231) segments <S2, 231> o SR policy (C1,E2) segments <S3, E2> /

New text:/

• With reference to the topology above:
  • An SR Policy provides intra-domain intent. The examples of SID lists of SR policies in each domain corresponding to a label stack in Figure 7: o SR policy (C1,121) segments <S1, 121>, o SR policy (C1,231) segments <S2, 231>, and o SR policy (C1,E2) segments <S3, E2>. /

-09 text:/

• An SR Policy provides intra-domain intent. Following are the example SID lists that are realized from SR policies in each domain and correspond to the label stack shown in Figure 7 o SR policy (C1,121) segments <S1, 121>, o SR policy (C1,231) segments <S2, 231>, and o SR policy (C1,E2) segments <S3, E2>. /

new text:/

• An SR Policy provides intra-domain intent. The following are the example SID lists that are realized from SR policies in each domain and correspond to the label stack shown in Figure 7 o SR policy (C1,121) segments <S1, 121>, o SR policy (C1,231) segments <S2, 231>, and o SR policy (C1,E2) segments <S3, E2>./

[suehares]

G4-5: Missing article and space in A.2

-09-status: Resolved, closed -08-Status: Not Resolved

Note: Changed text is bolded in the new text to aid the reader of the problem report. Please remove the bold before adding the change to the text. Old Text:/

• On each BGP hop, CAR route (E2, C1) next hop is resolved over an SR policy(C1, next hop). New text:/
  • On each BGP hop, the CAR route (E2, C1) next hop is resolved over an SR policy (C1, next hop)./

[suehares]

G4-6: Section A.4

09-status: - resolved, closed 08-status: Partial resolution, 08-next-steps: Talk to DJ (4/24). What: replace ";" with ","** and edits for clear sentences. Note: I've bolded changes to make these easier to read. Please remove the bold before inserting in the text. -07 text:/

• In a brownfield deployment, color-aware paths between two PEs may need to go through a transit domain that does not support CAR. Examples include an MPLS LDP network with IGP best-effort; or a BGP-LU based multi-domain network. MPLS LDP network with best effort IGP can adopt above scheme. Below is the example for BGP LU./ New text:/ In a brownfield deployment, color-aware paths between two PEs may need to go through a transit domain that does not support CAR. Examples of such a brownfield network are an MPLS LDP network with IGP best-effort, or a BGP-LU based multi-domain network. An MPLS LDP network with best effort IGP can adopt the above scheme in section A.3. Below is the example scenario for BGP LU./

[suehares]

G4-7: Section A.5 - Sentence form needs commands + added text.

08-Status: Resolved, closed

Old text:/

• C1 and C2 represent two unique intents in multi-domain network
  • C1 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric"
  • C2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric and avoid resource R" / New text:/
• C1 and C2 represent the following two unique intents in multi-domain network
  • C1 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric", and
  • C2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric and avoid resource R". /

[suehares]

G4-8: Section A.5 - Sentence needs a period.

08-status: Resolved, closed

Each of the sentences below needs a period. Old text:

• Resource R represents link(s) or node(s) to be avoided

• Flex-Algo FA128 in Domain 2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric" and hence to C1

• Flex-Algo FA129 in Domain 2 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric and avoid resource R" and hence to C2

• Flex-Algo FA128 in Domain 1 is mapped to "minimize IGP metric"

  • There is no resource R to be avoided in Domain 1, hence both C1 and C2 are mapped to FA128 /

[suehares]

G4-9: Section A.5 - sentence needs command + added text.

-08-text: Resolved, closed Old text:/

• E1 receives two service routes from E2:

  • V/v with BGP Color Extended-Community C1
  • W/w with BGP Color Extended-Community C2

• E1 has the following color-aware paths:

  • (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution: o Domain1: over IGP FA128 o Domain2: over IGP FA128
  • (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution: o Domain1: over IGP FA128 o Domain2: over IGP FA129, avoiding resource R

• E1 automatically steers the received service routes as follows:

  • V/v via (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR
  • W/w via (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR / New text:/

• E1 receives the following two service routes from E2:

  • V/v with BGP Color Extended-Community C1, and
  • W/w with BGP Color Extended-Community C2.

• E1 has the following color-aware paths:

  • (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution:

    o Domain1: over IGP FA128, and o Domain2: over IGP FA128.

  • (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR with the following per-domain resolution: o Domain1: over IGP FA128, and o Domain2: over IGP FA129 (avoiding resource R).

• E1 automatically steers the received service routes as follows:

  • V/v via (E2, C1) provided by BGP CAR, and
  • W/w via (E2, C2) provided by BGP CAR. /

[suehares]

G4-10 Section A.7 - Missing periods

-08-status: Resolved, closed

07-text:/

• Both E2 (in egress domain 2) and E3 (in egress domain 3) advertise Anycast (shared) IP (IP1, C1) with same label L1 / New-text:/
• Both E2 (in egress domain 2) and E3 (in egress domain 3) advertise Anycast (shared) IP (IP1, C1) with same label L1./

[suehares]

G4-11: Section A.7 - use active tense in sentence

-08-status: resolved, closed

Old text:/ If D2 and D3 belonged to different color domains, the domains will coordinate the assignment of colors to be used with shared IP IP1 such that they do not cause conflicts. / New text:/ If D2 and D3 belong to different color domains, the domains will coordinate the assignment of colors with shared IP IP1 so that they do not cause conflicts. /

[suehares]

G4-12, Appendix B, first paragraph

08-Status: Resolved, close Old text:/There are a variety of deployment scenarios that arise w.r.t different color mappings in an inter-domain environment/.

Why use w.r.t when the word "concerning" works? Note: w.r.t. was changed to "when"

[suehares]

G4-13, Appendix B.2, missing commands and spaces

-08-status: Resolved, closed Old text:/

• With reference to the topology above:

  • Core domain provides 4 intra domain intents as described below: o FA128 mapped to C10 o FA129 mapped to C20 o FA130 mapped to C30 o FA131 mapped to C40

  • Access domain provides 2 intra domain intents o FA132 mapped to C1 o FA133 mapped to C2

  • Operator defines 4 BGP CAR end to end intents as below o CAR color C100 that resolves on C1 in access and C10 in core domain o CAR color C200 that resolves on C1 in access and C20 in core domain o CAR color C300 that resolves on C2 in access and C30 in core domain o CAR color C400 that resolves on C2 in access and C40 in core domain / New text - change lists to complete sentences

new text:/ With reference to the topology above, the following occurs o FA128 is mapped to C10, o FA129 is mapped to C20, o FA130 is mapped to C30, and o FA131 is mapped to C40.

  -  Access domain provides 2 intra-domain intents
     o  FA132 is mapped to C1, and
     o  FA133 is mapped to C2. 

  -  Operator defines 4 BGP CAR end-to-end intents as below
     o  CAR color C100 that resolves on C1 in access and C10 in core 
        domain, 
     o  CAR color C200 that resolves on C1 in access and C20 in core
        domain, 
     o  CAR color C300 that resolves on C2 in access and C30 in core
        domain, and 
     o  CAR color C400 that resolves on C2 in access and C40 in core
        domain. /

[suehares]

G4-14: Appendix B.2

08-status: Resolved, closed

Why: Punctuation and Spacing. Old text: / For example (E2,C100)with BGP color ECs C1, C10 resolves over C1 at ABR 231, C10 at ABR 121 and C1 at E1./ New text:/For example (E2,C100) with BGP color ECs C1, C10 resolves over C1 at ABR 231, C10 at ABR 121, and C1 at E1./

[suehares]

G4-15 Appendix B.3 - Two clauses give a side note (, clause, clause)

08-Status: Resolved, closed

Note: changed text is in bold. Old text:/ When the routes are distributed between domains with different color- to-intent mapping schemes, both N:N and N:M cases are possible, although an N:M mapping is more likely to occur. / New text:/ When the routes are distributed between domains with different color- to-intent mapping schemes, both N:N and N:M cases are possible. Although an N:M mapping is more likely to occur. /

[suehares]

G4-16: Appendix B.3- missing periods at the end of a sentence

-08-status: Resolved, closed

Note: Changes in the next text are in bold. Remove bold before inserting in the document. Old text:/

• A BR in D2 receiving (E, C1) maps C1 in received LCM-EC to local color, say C2 [snip]

  • A BR in D2 may receive (E, C1) from multiple D1 BRs which provide equal cost or primary/backup paths [snip].

• A colored service route V/v originated in color domain D1 with next hop E and color C1 will also have its color extended- community value re-mapped to C2, typically at a service RR

• On an ingress PE in D2, V/v will resolve via C2 / New text:/

• A BR in D2 receiving (E, C1) maps C1 in received LCM-EC to local color, say C2. [snip]

  • A BR in D2 may receive (E, C1) from multiple D1 BRs which provide equal cost or primary/backup paths. [snip].

• A colored service route V/v originated in color domain D1 with next hop E, and color C1 will also have its Color-EC value re-mapped to C2. This remapping will typically occur at a service RR.

• On an ingress PE in D2, V/v will resolve via C2. /

[suehares]

G4-17: Appendix C.1

08-status: Resolved, closed

Please make sure each bullet line has a period. You are missing several periods.

[suehares]

G4-18: Appendix C.2

09-status: resolved, closed 08-Status: Partial (one minor NIT).

Please make sure each bullet line has a period. You are missing several periods.

08-text: / For example, 231 and 121 signal SRv6 SID of END behavior [RFC8986] allocated from their respective locators for the C1 intent. (Note, IGP Flex-Algo is shown for intra-domain path, but SR-Policy may also provide the path as shown in Appendix C.3). /

New text Choice-1: / For example, 231 and 121 signal SRv6 SID of END behavior [RFC8986] allocated from their respective locators for the C1 intent. Note, IGP Flex-Algo is shown for intra-domain path, but SR-Policy may also provide the path as shown in Appendix C.3. /

New text Choice-1: / For example, 231 and 121 signal SRv6 SID of END behavior [RFC8986] allocated from their respective locators for the C1 intent (Note: IGP Flex-Algo is shown for intra-domain path, but SR-Policy may also provide the path as shown in Appendix C.3.)** /

[suehares]

G4-19: Appendix C.3

08-Status: Resolved, closed a) Title - should include the phrases "Non-Routed Service SID"

[suehares]

G4-20: Appendix C.3

08-text: Resolved, Closed

Old text:/ IPv6 packet destination B:C21:2:B6:: lookup in mySID table on ABR 231 or 232 results in END.B6 behavior i.e. push of policy segments to E2. / New text:/ IPv6 packet destination B:C21:2:B6:: lookup in mySID table on ABR 231 or 232 results in END.B6 behavior (i.e. push of policy segments to E2)./

[suehares]

G4-21:B Appendix C.3

-09-txt status: Resolved, closed Please make sure each bullet line has a period. You are missing a few periods.

[suehares]

G4-22: - Use COLOR-EC abbreviation for clarity A.2, A.3.1, A.3.2, B.2

-08-status: Resolved, Closed

G4-22a: A.2

Old Text:/

• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with (color extended community) C1 to steer traffic to BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. / New text:/
• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with Color-EC C1 to steer traffic to BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. /

G4-22b - A.3.1

Old text:/

• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with (color extended community) C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. / New text:/
• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with Color-EC C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1. /

G4-22c - A.3.2

Old text:/

• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with (color extended community) C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1./ New text :/
• Egress PE E2 advertises a VPN route RD:V/v colored with
  Color-EC C1 to steer traffic via BGP transport CAR (E2, C1). VPN route propagates via service RRs to ingress PE E1./

[suehares]

G4-23 - Flex Algo textual clarity - sections A.3.1

-09-status: Resolved, closed after discussion with DJ 08-Status: Not resolved: 08-next-steps: Discuss Text with DJ (4/24) Why: Unclear text. Old Text:/

• Local policy on 231 and 232 maps intent C1 to resolve CAR route next hop over IGP base algo 0 in right access domain. BGP CAR label swap entry is installed that goes over algo 0 LSP to next hop. Update AIGP metric to reflect algo 0 metric to next hop with an additional penalty (+1000). / Change "IGP base algo 0" to "IGP Base flex algo 0". Change "Update" to "Updates" Change "reflect algo 0 metric" to "reflect flex algo 0 metric"

DJ# We did not change this because base Algo 0 (base spf) is not referred to as a 'Flex Algo'.

[suehares]

G4-24: Missing figure numbers in A.4 to A

08-status: Resolved, closed

Missing figures: Figure in A.4 - Reference topology should be Figure 10. Packet forwarding diagram at the end of C.1 - would be better as a Figure 16 Packet forwarding diagram at the end of C2 - would be better as Figure 18

Figures: A.4 - Reference topology should be Figure 10. A.5 - Should be figure 11 (currently Figure 10). A.7 - Should be figure 12 (currently Figure 11). B.2 - Should be figure 13 (currently Figure 12). B.3 - Should be figure 14 (not currently a figure) C.1 - Should be Figure 15 (currently figure 13). C1 - Packet forwarding at the end of C.1 Should be figure 16 (not currently a figure).
C2 - Should be Figure 17 (currently figure 14)
C2 - Packet forwarding at end of C2. Should be figure 18 (not currently a figure) D - The Table in D should be Figure 19 or a listed as a Table.

Figures could be improved by showing direction of routes and direction of traffic flow.

[suehares]

G4-25: Text Clarity in A.3.2

08-Status: Resolved, closed

Old Text:

• Local policy on 121 and 122 maps intent C1 to resolve CAR route next hop in Core domain over TE tunnels. BGP CAR label swap entry is installed that goes over a TE tunnel to next hop providing intent in Core domain. AIGP metric is updated to reflect TE tunnel metric.
  [snip]
  • Important:
• TE tunnel LSP provides intent in Core domain.
• Dynamic BGP CAR label carries intent from PEs which is realized in core domain by resolution via TE tunnel. /

what to fix: If TE tunnels are RSVP-TE, please change the text to reflect that. If TE Tunnels can be a variety of TE technologies, specify the technologies.

[suehares]

G4-26: in A.6 Clarity on "N" being prefix or Next Hop.

09-status: Resolved, closed 08-Status: Not resolved, Partial change 08-next-steps: Discuss with DJ on 4/24

Unclear text: Is "N" - a next hop or a Prefix? (text in bold and italics to help you see it.) -08-text/

• Ingress PE E1 is configured to instantiate an array of paths to E2 where the entry 0 is the BGP LU path to next hop, color C1 is the first entry and color C2 is the second entry. The index into the array is called a Forwarding Class (FC). The index can have values 0 to 7, especially when derived from the MPLS TC bits [RFC5462]./

-07-Text in A.6: /

• Ingress PE E1 is configured to instantiate an array of paths to E2 where entry 0 is the BGP LU path to N, color C1 is the first entry and color C2 is the second entry. The index into the array is called a Forwarding Class (FC). The index can have values 0 to 7, especially when derived from the MPLS TC bits [RFC5462] /

DR# N is the next-hop, so an address. We have updated the text to 'next hop'.

[suehares]

G4-27: Text Clarity in B.2

08-status: Resolved, closed

Old text: / Each BGP CAR color/ New text: / Each ETE BGP CAR color/

[suehares]

G4-28: Text Clarity in B.3

08-status: Resolved, closed

Old text:/ * The original intent in the BGP CAR route is preserved; i.e. route is (E, C1) / What to fix: Please explain how the original color is preserved. Is it preserved in the NLRI?

[suehares]

G4-29: Appendix D is a theoretical Analysis

09-status: Resolved, closed. 08-status: Partial, not complete, 08-next-step: Discuss with DJ on 4/24. Change: Required change.

Please note that Appendix D is a theoretical analysis based on normal data. Please adjust your text to complete this information.

Required: 08-text: Analysis below shows comparison of total BGP data on the wire for CAR SAFI and [RFC8277] style encoding in MPLS label (CASE A), SR extension with MPLS (per-prefix label index in Prefix-SID attribute) [RFC8669] (CASE B) and SRv6 SID (CASE C) cases. / 08-text: The theoretical analysis below shows a comparison of total BGP data on the wire for CAR SAFI and [RFC8277] style encoding in MPLS label (CASE A), SR extension with MPLS (per-prefix label index in Prefix-SID attribute) [RFC8669] (CASE B) and SRv6 SID (CASE C) cases. /

[suehares]

G4-30: Location A.5, NIT

-09-status: closed, resolved

08-text:/

• C1 and C2 represent the following two unique intents in multi- domain network/ new-text:/ NIT: Location A.5
• C1 and C2 represent the following two unique intents in multi- domain network:/

[suehares]

Resolved: G4-1, G4-2, G4-3, G4-4,G-6 (partial) , G4-7, G4-8, G4-9, G4-10, G4-11, G4-12, G4-13, G4-15, G4-16, G4-17, G4-18 (Partial), G4-19, G4-20, G4-21, G4-22, G4-23, G4-24, G4-25, G4-26 (Partial), G4-27, G4-28, Not resolved Non-NITS: G4-4, G4-29 (Must change) Not Resolved NITS: G4-3, G4-5, G4-6 (Partial), G4-18 (Partial), G4-26 (Partial), G4-30

[suehares]

09-Text status:

All issues resolved. Closing issue.