Hi Dear authors, I'm assigned to review draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id by OPSDir. And my comments are based on the -13 version.

General status: Ready with Nits. Comments are as below:

1) Section 4 – Operational Considerations: it could refer to Section 4.2.2 of RFC9830 more accurately, where it says "an SR Policy NLRI with an unrecognized or unsupported sub-TLV SHOULD NOT be considered usable, while an implementation MAY have an option to ignore unsupported sub-TLVs". So, using "invalid" here may not be very accurate. I think there is slight difference between “not usable” and “invalid”.

2) It may be good to add a little more discussion about mixed deployment. For example, would there be some failure cases if the new sub-TLV is sent to the headend nodes that don’t support it, and do operators need to selectively advertising or configuring the sub-TLV in such scenarios etc.

B.R.
Bing