Hi WG, I support the adoption of draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection-14 by the SPRING Working Group. The document provides a valuable and timely enhancement to SR Policy path selection by introducing dynamic eligibility decisions based on real-time forwarding quality and resource metrics. Also, I would like to offer two minor clarification requests regarding the definition of available bandwidth and actual bandwidth, which could be solved after adoption: （1）The current formula defines CP available bandwidth as: CP preset bandwidth × (Sum of weights of Segment Lists in Up state / Sum of all Segment List weights). However, as weight is primarily used for load-balancing ratio and is logically decoupled from the actual capacity of each Segment List, this proportional model may not accurately reflect the true available capacity. It would be helpful to either clarify the assumptions behind this model or consider whether an explicit per-Segment-List bandwidth attribute might be needed in certain deployment scenarios. （2）the term actual bandwidth is defined as “the sum of the actual available remaining bandwidth of each valid segment list.” It would be better if the document explicitly states whether “remaining bandwidth” refers to: Physical link capacity minus measured traffic, or TE reservable bandwidth minus currently reserved/allocated bandwidth.
Best regards, Guanming Zeng -----Original Message----- From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2026 11:08 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [spring] Call for adoption: draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection-14 (Ends 2026-05-08) This message starts a spring WG Call for Adoption of: draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection-14 This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-05-08 Abstract: This document describes a flexible method for selecting candidate Segment Routing (SR) policy paths. Based on the real-time resource usage and forwarding quality of candidate paths, the head node can perform dynamic path switching among multiple candidate paths in the SR policy. Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support adoption of this Internet-Draft by the spring WG. Comments to explain your preference are greatly appreciated. Also, please indicate your willingness to review future versions of this document. Reply to all recipients of this message and include this message in your response. Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2]. 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/ The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection/ There is also an HTMLized version available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection-14 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection-14 _______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
