Internet-Draft IS-IS PG September 2026
Barth, et al. Expires 3 April 2027 [Page]
Workgroup:
LSR WG
Internet-Draft:
draft-many-lsr-power-group-04
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
C. Barth
HPE
T. Li
HPE
V. P. Beeram
HPE
R. Bonica
HPE

IS-IS Support For The Power Conserving Path Placement Strategy (PCPPS)

Abstract

[I-D.many-teas-power-steering] introduces a Power Conserving Path Placement Strategy (PCPPS). When possible, PCPPS concentrates traffic onto a small set of network resources. When traffic is concentrated onto a small set of network resources, other network resources become idle and can be powered down until they are needed again. This conserves energy and reduces environmental impact.

PCPPS uses information that is distributed by an IGP. This document specifies the IS-IS encoding for that information.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 April 2027.

▲

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

[I-D.many-teas-power-steering] introduces a Power Conserving Path Placement Strategy (PCPPS). When possible, PCPPS concentrates traffic onto a small set of network resources. When traffic is concentrated onto a small set of network resources, other network resources become idle and can be powered down until they are needed again. This conserves energy and reduces environmental impact.

PCPPS uses information that is distributed by an IGP. This document specifies the IS-IS encoding for that information.

2. Conventions and Definitions

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

3. Terminology

The following terms are used in this document and defined in [I-D.many-teas-power-steering]:

5. Security Considerations

The information defined in this document is used by path-computation systems and may influence whether network resources are placed into power-sleep mode. An attacker that can inject, modify, replay, or suppress IS-IS advertisements could advertise false Power Group identifiers, PSP values, parent relationships, sleep states, sleeping bandwidth, or power-sleep capability.

False advertisements could cause traffic to be concentrated on insufficient capacity, cause a sleeping resource to be selected, prevent eligible resources from being powered down, or cause repeated and unnecessary power-state transitions. False parent relationships could also alter the computed Power Group hierarchy and the resulting path selection. Implementations MUST validate received values according to the procedures in this document and MUST NOT use malformed, unresolvable, or otherwise invalid values for path computation.

Implementations and operators SHOULD use the IS-IS authentication mechanisms appropriate for the deployment to protect these advertisements from unauthorized modification and injection. IS-IS authentication does not by itself prevent an authorized but misconfigured router from originating incorrect information; therefore, access to the control plane and configuration of power-management parameters should be restricted to trusted systems and operators.

Implementations MUST apply normal IS-IS LSP sequence-number, lifetime, purge, and withdrawal processing to the TLVs defined in this document. Power Group and Sleeping Adjacencies information MUST NOT be retained after the originating LSP set is no longer valid. During LSP convergence, implementations MUST follow the conflict-handling rules in this document and MUST avoid using information that is ambiguous or invalid.

Implementations SHOULD provide operational visibility into rejected, conflicting, expired, and otherwise invalid advertisements. A deployment should also ensure that the PCPPS or other path-computation component applies independent capacity and reachability checks before placing traffic on paths that rely on sleeping-bandwidth or power-sleep information.

6. IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to add the following entries to the IS-IS Top-Level TLV Codepoints registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml#tlv-codepoints):

Table 1: IS-IS Top-Level TLV Codepoints
Value Name IIH LSP SNP Purge MP Status Reference
TBD1 Power Group N Y N N N This document
TBD2 Sleeping Adjacencies N Y N N N This document

IANA is also requested to add the following entries to the IS-IS Sub-TLVs for TLVs Advertising Neighbor Information registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml#isis-tlv-codepoints-advertising-neighbor-information):

Table 2: IS-IS Sub-TLVs for TLVs Advertising Neighbor Information
Type Description 22 23 25 141 222 223 MP Reference
TBD3 Power Group Member Y N N N Y N N This document
TBD4 Interface PSP Y N N N Y N N This document
TBD5 Unidirectional Sleeping Bandwidth (LAG only) Y N N N Y N N This document

IANA is also requested to add the following entry to the IS-IS Neighbor Link-Attribute Bit Values registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml#isis-tlv-codepoints-19of22):

Table 3: IS-IS Neighbor Link-Attribute Bit Values
Value Name L2BM Reference
TBD6 Power-Sleep Capable (requested bit value 0x0008) N This document

7. Acknowledgements

Thanks to Les Ginsberg for his review and comments.

8. Normative References

[I-D.many-teas-power-steering]
Barth, C., Li, T., Beeram, V. P., and R. P. Bonica, "A Power Conserving Path Placement Strategy (PCPPS)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-many-teas-power-steering-02, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-many-teas-power-steering-02>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC5029]
Vasseur, JP. and S. Previdi, "Definition of an IS-IS Link Attribute Sub-TLV", RFC 5029, DOI 10.17487/RFC5029, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5029>.
[RFC5305]
Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5305>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.

Authors' Addresses

Colby Barth
HPE
United States of America
Tony Li
HPE
United States of America
Vishnu Pavan Beeram
HPE
United States of America
Ron Bonica
HPE
United States of America