# Service Candidate Enrichment Plan — 4WNET-MNS-KTG-RX

**Date:** 2026-04-29
**Device:** 4WNET-MNS-KTG-RX (ID: 1890)
**FASE:** 2.9
**Security:** Read-only analysis, no writes, no tokens

---

## Executive Summary

Analyzed 7 service candidates from ImportPlan for device 4WNET-MNS-KTG-RX.

| Category | Count | Action |
|----------|-------|--------|
| Ready for Review | 1 | Expedite to approval |
| Missing Metadata | 6 | Owner engagement required |
| Naming Failed | 0 | — |
| Ambiguous | 0 | — |
| Blocked | 0 | — |
| Ignored | 0 | — |

**Next Step:** Engage service owners for metadata enrichment on 6 items (missing tenant).

---

## 1. Ready for Review (1 item)

Items that have sufficient metadata and can move to approval review.

### BGP Peer: 203.0.113.1
- **Type:** bgp_peer
- **Status:** ✅ Ready for Review
- **Metadata Present:**
  - Remote IP: 203.0.113.1
  - Device: 4WNET-MNS-KTG-RX
  - Confidence: exact
- **Metadata Missing:**
  - remote_asn (tenant/ISP identification)
  - remote_bgp_group (logical grouping)
  - description (circuit/purpose)
- **Recommendation:** Create ApprovalRecord with available data; request remote_asn from network team

---

## 2. Missing Required Metadata (6 items)

Items that cannot proceed to approval without enrichment.

### Category: Missing Tenant (6 items)

Subinterfaces exist in device inventory but lack tenant assignment in NetBox.

**Items:**

1. **Eth-Trunk0.10**
   - Type: subinterface
   - Parent: Eth-Trunk0 ✅ (exists in NetBox)
   - Fields Present: name, enabled
   - Fields Missing: **tenant** (REQUIRED), service_type, criticality
   - Confidence: exact (from device inventory)
   - Action: Engage service owner → request tenant assignment

2. **Eth-Trunk0.147**
   - Type: subinterface
   - Parent: Eth-Trunk0 ✅ (exists in NetBox)
   - Fields Present: name, enabled
   - Fields Missing: **tenant** (REQUIRED), service_type, criticality
   - Confidence: exact (from device inventory)
   - Action: Engage service owner → request tenant assignment

3. **Eth-Trunk0.1580**
   - Type: subinterface
   - Parent: Eth-Trunk0 ✅ (exists in NetBox)
   - Fields Present: name, enabled
   - Fields Missing: **tenant** (REQUIRED), service_type, criticality
   - Confidence: exact (from device inventory)
   - Action: Engage service owner → request tenant assignment

4. **Eth-Trunk0.1589**
   - Type: subinterface
   - Parent: Eth-Trunk0 ✅ (exists in NetBox)
   - Fields Present: name, enabled
   - Fields Missing: **tenant** (REQUIRED), service_type, criticality
   - Confidence: exact (from device inventory)
   - Action: Engage service owner → request tenant assignment

5. **Eth-Trunk0.1606**
   - Type: subinterface
   - Parent: Eth-Trunk0 ✅ (exists in NetBox)
   - Fields Present: name, enabled
   - Fields Missing: **tenant** (REQUIRED), service_type, criticality
   - Confidence: exact (from device inventory)
   - Action: Engage service owner → request tenant assignment

6. **192.0.2.1/30** (IP Address)
   - Type: ip_address
   - Fields Present: address (192.0.2.1/30)
   - Fields Missing: **interface** (REQUIRED), **vrf** (REQUIRED), tenant
   - Confidence: exact (from device inventory)
   - Action: Engage network team → clarify interface/VRF association

---

## 3. Enrichment Required Actions

### By Priority

**HIGH PRIORITY:**
- 5 subinterfaces (Eth-Trunk0.10, .147, .1580, .1589, .1606) waiting for tenant assignment
- 1 IP address (192.0.2.1/30) waiting for interface/VRF mapping

**MEDIUM PRIORITY:**
- 1 BGP peer (203.0.113.1) waiting for remote_asn/remote_bgp_group

### By Owner

**Service Team** (Subinterfaces + IP):
- Tenant assignment for 5 subinterfaces
- VRF/interface mapping for IP address

**Network Operations** (BGP):
- Remote AS number for peer 203.0.113.1
- BGP group classification

---

## 4. Enrichment Fields to Collect

### Tenant Field (Subinterfaces)
**Question:** Which service/tenant does each subinterface belong to?
**Example:** internet, mpls, corporate, guest
**Impact:** Determines approval tier (strict vs. relaxed rules)

### Service Type (Subinterfaces)
**Question:** What type of service?
**Options:** circuit, L3VPN, MPLS, BGP, static, VLAN
**Impact:** Risk assessment and rollback strategy

### Criticality (Subinterfaces)
**Question:** Service criticality level?
**Options:** high, medium, low
**Impact:** Approval urgency and SLA commitment

### VRF + Interface (IP Address)
**Question:** On which interface/VRF is this IP assigned?
**Example:** GigabitEthernet0/5/0 in VRF internet
**Impact:** Device configuration validation

### Remote AS + BGP Group (BGP Peer)
**Question:** Peer AS number and logical grouping?
**Example:** AS 65000, BGP group ISP-Uplink-1
**Impact:** BGP session validation and policy application

---

## 5. Timeline & Next Steps

### Immediate (2026-04-29)
- [x] Analysis completed
- [x] Readiness categorized
- [ ] Engage service owners (TODAY)

### Week 1 (2026-05-02)
- [ ] Service owner enrichment responses collected
- [ ] VRF/interface mapping validated
- [ ] Remote AS numbers confirmed

### Week 2 (2026-05-09)
- [ ] Create ApprovalRecords with enriched data
- [ ] Risk assessment (BAIXO/MÉDIO/ALTO)
- [ ] Dry-run validation

### Week 3+ (2026-05-16)
- [ ] Approval review and decision
- [ ] Real batch execution
- [ ] Compliance verification

---

## 6. Risk Assessment

| Item | Current Risk | Blocker | Mitigation |
|------|--------------|---------|-----------|
| Eth-Trunk0.10-1606 (5x) | MÉDIO | Missing tenant | Owner engagement |
| 192.0.2.1/30 | MÉDIO | Missing interface/VRF | Network ops mapping |
| 203.0.113.1 (BGP) | MÉDIO | Missing remote_asn | BGP team confirmation |

**Overall Risk Level:** MÉDIO (6 items pending enrichment, no technical blockers)

---

## 7. Approval Prerequisites

Before any ApprovalRecord creation:

✅ Tenant assigned (service owner)
✅ Service type documented
✅ Criticality level set
✅ VRF/interface mapping confirmed
✅ Naming convention validated
✅ Parent objects exist (Eth-Trunk0 ✅)
✅ No secrets in metadata
✅ No naming injections

---

## 8. Security Notes

- ✅ Analysis read-only (zero API writes)
- ✅ No tokens used
- ✅ No NetBox writes
- ✅ No device configuration
- ✅ Audit trail: this report documents enrichment gaps
- ✅ Manual approval decision required before any write

---

## 9. Success Criteria (FASE 2.9)

- [x] Service candidates categorized by readiness ✅
- [x] Blockers and gaps identified ✅
- [x] Enrichment requirements documented ✅
- [x] Owner engagement plan established ✅
- [x] No automatic changes to inventory ✅
- [x] Audit trail complete ✅

---

## Appendix: Readiness Tool Output

Script: `tools/local/analyze_service_candidate_readiness.py`
Input: ImportPlan JSON for 4WNET-MNS-KTG-RX
Output: Ready for Review (1), Missing Metadata (6), Naming Failed (0), Ambiguous (0), Blocked (0), Ignored (0)
Generated: 2026-04-29T13:41:39Z

---

## See Also

- docs/45-service-candidate-enrichment-workflow.md
- reports/pilot-device-compliance/service-candidate-readiness-test.md
- tools/local/analyze_service_candidate_readiness.py