<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- edited with XMLSPY v5 rel. 3 U (http://www.xmlspy.com)
     by Daniel M Kohn (private) -->
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
]>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-zhuang-pce-stateful-pce-lsp-scheduling-03"
     ipr="trust200902">
  <?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>

  <?rfc toc="yes" ?>

  <?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>

  <?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>

  <?rfc iprnotified="no" ?>

  <?rfc strict="yes" ?>

  <front>
    <title abbrev="LSP Scheduling">PCEP Extensions for LSP scheduling with
    stateful PCE</title>

    <author fullname="Yan Zhuang" initials="Y." surname="Zhuang">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District</street>

          <city>Nanjing</city>

          <region>Jiangsu</region>

          <code>210012</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>zhuangyan.zhuang@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Qin Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District</street>

          <city>Nanjing</city>

          <region>Jiangsu</region>

          <code>210012</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>bill.wu@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Dhruv Dhody" initials="D." surname="Dhody">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield</street>

          <city>Bangalore</city>

          <region>Karnataka</region>

          <code>560066</code>

          <country>India</country>
        </postal>

        <email>dhruv.ietf@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Daniele Ceccarelli" initials="D." surname="Ceccarelli">
      <organization>Ericsson</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Via A. Negrone 1/A</street>

          <city>Genova - Sestri Ponente</city>

          <country>Italy</country>
        </postal>

        <email>daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date year="2016"/>

    <area>Routing Area</area>

    <workgroup>PCE Working Group</workgroup>

    <keyword>RFC</keyword>

    <keyword>Request for Comments</keyword>

    <keyword>I-D</keyword>

    <keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>

    <keyword>Path Computation Element</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document proposes a set of extensions needed to the stateful
      Path Computation Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP), so as to
      enable Labeled Switched Path (LSP) scheduling for path computation and
      LSP setup/deletion based on the actual network resource usage duration
      of a traffic service in a centralized network environment. A scheduled
      LSP can be setup at its starting time and deleted after its usage
      duration such that LSPs for the other traffic services can take over
      these network resources beyond that period.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section anchor="intro" title="Introduction">
      <t>The Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) defined in [RFC5440] is
      used between a Path Computation Element (PCE) and a Path Computation
      Client (PCC) (or other PCE) to enable computation of Multi-protocol
      Label Switching (MPLS) for Traffic Engineering Label Switched Path (TE
      LSP).</t>

      <t>Further, in order to support use cases described in [I-D.ietf-pce-
      stateful-pce-app], [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce] specifies a set of
      extensions to PCEP to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS LSPs
      via PCEP.</t>

      <t>Traditionally, the usage and allocation of network resources,
      especially bandwidth, can be supported by a Network Management System
      operation such as path pre-establishment. However, as discussed in
      [I-D.zhuang-teas-scheduled-resources],this does not provide efficient
      network usage since the established paths exclude the possibility of
      being used by other services even when they are not used for undertaking
      any service. [I-D.zhuang-teas-scheduled-resources] then provides a
      framework that describes and discusses the architecture for the
      scheduled reservation of TE resources.</t>

      <t>With the scheduled reservation of TE resources, it allows network
      operators to reserve resources in advance according to the agreements
      with their customers, and allow them to transmit data with scheduling
      such as specified starting time and duration, for example for a
      scheduled bulk data replication between data centers. It enables the
      activation of bandwidth usage at the time the service really being used
      while letting other services obtain it in spare time. The requirement of
      scheduled LSP provision is mentioned in [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app]
      and [RFC7399], so as to provide more efficient network resource usage
      for traffic engineering, which hasn't been solved yet. Also, for
      deterministic networks, the scheduled LSP can provide a better network
      resource usage for guaranteed links. This idea can also be applied in
      segment routing to schedule the network resources over the whole network
      in a centralized manner as well.</t>

      <t>With this in mind, this document proposes a set of extensions needed
      to the stateful PCE, so as to enable LSP scheduling for path computation
      and LSP setup/deletion based on the actual network resource usage
      duration of a traffic service. A scheduled LSP is characterized by a
      starting time and a duration. When the end of the LSP life is reached,
      it is deleted to free up the resources for other LSP (scheduled or
      not).</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Conventions used in this document">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
      document are to be interpreted as described in <xref
      target="RFC2119">RFC2119</xref>.</t>

      <section title="Terminology">
        <t>The following terminologies are re-used from existing PCE
        documents.<list style="symbols">
            <t>Active Stateful PCE [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce];</t>

            <t>Delegation [I-D.ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp];</t>

            <t>PCC [RFC5440], [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce];</t>

            <t>PCE [RFC5440], [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce];</t>

            <t>TE LSP [RFC5440], [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce];</t>

            <t>TED [RFC5440], [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce];</t>

            <t>LSP DB [RFC5440], [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce];</t>
          </list>In addition, this document defines the following
        terminologies.<list style="hanging">
            <t hangText="Scheduled TE LSP:">a LSP with the scheduling
            attributes,that carries traffic flow demand at an starting time
            and last for a certain duration. The PCE operates path computation
            per LSP availability at the required time and duration.</t>

            <t hangText="Scheduled LSP DB:">a database of scheduled LSPs</t>

            <t hangText="Scheduled TED:">Traffic engineering database with the
            awareness of scheduled LSPs. This database is generated by the PCE
            from the information in TED and scheduled LSP DB and allows
            knowing, at any time, the amount of available resources (does not
            include failures in the future).</t>

            <t hangText="Starting time:">This value indicates when the
            scheduled LSP is used and the corresponding LSP must be setup and
            active. In other time(i.e., before the starting time or after the
            starting time plus Duration), the LSP can be inactive to include
            the possibility of the resources being used by other services.</t>

            <t hangText="Duration:">The value indicates the time duration that
            the LSP is undertaken by a traffic flow and the corresponding LSP
            must be setup and active. At the end of which, the LSP is teardown
            and removed from the data base.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Motivation and Objectives">
      <t>A stateful PCE can support better efficiency by using LSP scheduling
      described in the use case of [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]. This requires
      the PCE to maintain the scheduled LSPs and their associated resource
      usage, e.g. bandwidth for Packet-switched network, as well as the
      ability to trigger signaling for the LSP setup/tear-down at the correct
      time.</t>

      <t>Note that existing configuration tools can be used for LSP
      scheduling, but as highlighted in section 3.1.3 of [I-D.ietf-pce-
      stateful-pce] as well as discussions in
      [I-D.zhuang-teas-scheduled-resources], doing this as a part of PCEP in a
      centralized manner, has obvious advantages.</t>

      <t>The objective of this document is to provide a set of extensions to
      PCEP to enable LSP scheduling for LSPs creation/deletion under the
      stateful PCE control, according to traffic services from customers, so
      as to improve the usage of network resources.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Architecture Overview">
      <section title="LSP scheduling Overview">
        <t>The LSP scheduling allows PCEs and PCCs to provide scheduled LSP
        for customers' traffic services at its actual usage time, so as to
        improve the network resource efficient utilization.</t>

        <t>For stateful PCE supporting LSP scheduling, there are two types of
        LSP databases used in this document. One is the LSP-DB defined in PCEP
        [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce], while the other is the scheduled LSP
        database (SLSP- DB, see section 6). The SLSP-DB records scheduled LSPs
        and is used as a complementary to the TED and LSP-DB. Note that the
        two types of LSP databases can be implemented in one physical database
        or two different databases. This document does not state any
        preference here.</t>

        <t>Furthermore, a scheduled TED is generated from the scheduled LSP
        DB, LSP DB and TED by PCEs to indicate the network topology with
        resource availability information for now and future. The scheduled
        TED should be maintained by all PCEs within the network
        environment.</t>

        <t>In case of implementing PCC-initiated scheduled LSPs, a PCC can
        request a path computation with LSP information of its scheduling
        parameters, including the starting time and the duration. Upon
        receiving the request with the scheduled LSP delegation, a stateful
        PCE SHALL check the scheduled TED for the network resource
        availability on network nodes and computes a path for the LSP with the
        scheduling information.</t>

        <t>For a multiple PCE environment, in order to coordinate the
        scheduling request of the LSP path over the network, the PCE needs to
        send a requestmessage with the path information as well as the
        scheduled resource for the scheduled LSP to other PCEs within the
        network, so as to coordinate with their scheduled LSP DBs and
        scheduled TEDs. Once other PCEs receive the request message with the
        scheduled LSPs information, if not conflicting with their scheduled
        LSP DBs, they reply to the requesting PCE with a response message
        carrying the scheduled LSP and update their scheduled LSP DBs and
        scheduled TEDs. After the requesting PCE confirms with all PCEs, the
        PCE SHALL add the scheduled LSP into its scheduled LSP Database and
        update its scheduled TED.</t>

        <t>Then the stateful PCE can response to the PCC with the path for the
        scheduled LSP to notify the result of the computation. However, the
        PCC should not signal the LSP over the path once receiving these
        messages since the path is not activated yet until its starting
        time.</t>

        <t>Alternatively, the service can also be initiated by PCE itself. In
        case of implementing PCE-initiated scheduled LSP, the stateful PCE
        shall check the network resource availability for the traffic and
        computes a path for the scheduled LSP per request in the same way as
        in PCC- Initiated mode and then for a multiple PCE network
        environment, coordinate the scheduled LSP with other PCEs in the
        network in the same way as in the PCC-Initiated mode.</t>

        <t>In both modes, for activation of scheduled LSPs, the stateful PCE
        can send a path computation LSP Initiate (PCInitiate message) with LSP
        information at its starting time to the PCC for signaling the LSP over
        the network nodes as defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-pce- initiated-lsp].
        Also, in the PCC-initiated mode, with scheduling information ,the PCC
        can activate the LSP itself by triggering over the path at its
        starting time as well. When the scheduling usage expires, active
        stateful PCE SHALL remove the LSP from the network , as well as notify
        other PCEs to delete the scheduled LSP from the scheduled LSP
        database.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Support of LSP Scheduling">
        <section title="Stateful PCE Capability TLV">
          <t>After a TCP connection for a PCEP session has been established, a
          PCC and a PCE indicates its ability to support LSP scheduling during
          the PCEP session establishment phase. For a multiple-PCE
          environment, the PCEs should also establish PCEP session and
          indicate its ability to support LSP scheduling among PCEP peers. The
          Open Object in the Open message contains the STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY
          TLV defined in [I- D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]. Note that the STATEFUL-
          PCE-CAPABILITY TLV is defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful- pce] and
          updated in [I-D.ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp] and [I-D.ietf-
          pce-stateful-sync-optimizations]. In this document, we define a new
          flag bit B (SCHED-LSP-CAPABLITY) flag for the STATEFUL-
          PCE-CAPABILITY TLV to indicate the support of LSP scheduling.</t>

          <t><list style="hanging">
              <t hangText="B (LSP-SCHEDULING-CAPABILITY - 1 bit):">If set to 1
              by a PCC, the B Flag indicates that the PCC allows LSP
              scheduling; if set to 1 by a PCE, the B Flag indicates that the
              PCE is capable of LSP scheduling. The B bit MUST be set by both
              PECP peers in order to support LSP scheduling for path
              computation.</t>
            </list></t>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Scheduled LSP creation">
        <t>In order to realize PCC-Initiated scheduled LSP in a centralized
        network environment, a PCC has to separate the setup of a LSP into two
        steps. The first step is to request and get a LSP but not signal it
        over the network. The second step is to signal the scheduled LSP over
        the LSRs (Labeled switched Router) at its starting time.</t>

        <t>For PCC-Initiated scheduled LSPs, a PCC can send a path computation
        request (PCReq) message (see section 4.3.1) or a path computation LSP
        report (PCRpt) message (see section 4.3.1) including its demanded
        resources with the scheduling information and delegation to a stateful
        PCE.</t>

        <t>Upon receiving the delegation via PCRpt message, the stateful PCE
        computes the path for the scheduled LSP per its starting time and
        duration based on the network resource availability stored in
        scheduled TED (see section 4.1).</t>

        <t>If a resultant path is found, the stateful PCE will send a PCReq
        message with the path information as well as the scheduled resource
        information for the scheduled LSP to other PCEs within the network if
        there is any, so as to keep their scheduling information
        synchronized.</t>

        <t>Once other PCEs receive the PCReq message with the scheduled LSP,
        if not conflicts with their scheduled LSP DBs, they will reply to the
        requesting PCE with a PCRep message carrying the scheduled LSP and
        update their scheduled LSP DBs and scheduled TEDs. After the
        requesting PCE confirms with all PCEs, the PCE SHALL add the scheduled
        LSP into its scheduled LSP DB and update its scheduled TED. If
        conflicts happen or no path available is found, the requesting PCE
        SHALL return a PCRep message with NO PATH back to the PCC. Otherwise,
        the stateful PCE will send a PCRep message or PCUpd message (see
        section 4.3.3) with the path information back to the PCC as
        confirmation.</t>

        <t>For PCE-Initiated Scheduled LSP, the stateful PCE can compute a
        path for the scheduled LSP per requests from network management
        systems automatically based on the network resource availability in
        the scheduled TED and coordinate with other PCEs on the scheduled LSP
        in the same way as in the PCC- Initiated mode.</t>

        <t>In both modes:<list style="symbols">
            <t>the stateful PCE is required to update its local scheduled LSP
            DB and scheduled TED with the scheduled LSP. Besides, it shall
            send a PCReq message with the scheduled LSP to other PCEs within
            the network, so as to achieve the scheduling traffic engineering
            information synchronization.</t>

            <t>Upon receiving the PCRep message or PCUpd message for scheduled
            LSP from PCEs with a found path, the PCC knows that it gets a
            scheduled path for the LSP but not trigger signaling for the LSP
            setup on LSRs.</t>

            <t>In any case, stateful PCE can update the Scheduled LSP
            parameters on any network events using the PCUpd message to PCC as
            well as other PCEs.</t>
          </list></t>

        <section title="The PCReq message and PCRpt Message">
          <t>After scheduled LSP capability negotiation and for PCC Initiated
          scheduled LSPs, for PCC-Initiated mode, a PCC can send a PCReq
          message or a PCRpt message including the SCHED-LSP- ATTRIBUTE TLV
          (see section 4.3.4.1) carried in the LSP Object (see section 4.3.4)
          body to indicate the requested LSP scheduling parameters for a
          customer's traffic service with the delegation bit set to 1 in LSP
          Object. The value of requested bandwidth is taken via the existing
          'Requested Bandwidth with BANDWIDTH Object- Type as 1' defined in
          [RFC5440].</t>

          <t>Meanwhile, for both modes (PCC-Initiated and PCE-Initiated), the
          delegated PCE shall distribute the scheduling information to other
          PCEs in the environment by sending a PCReq message with the
          SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV, as well as the Bandwith Object and RRO for
          the found path.</t>

          <t>The definition of the PCReq message and PCRpt message to carry
          LSP objects (see [I- D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]) remains
          unchanged.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="The PCRep Message">
          <t>To provide scheduled LSP for TE-LSPs, the stateful PCE SHALL
          compute the path for the scheduled LSP carried on PCReq message
          based on network resource availability recorded in scheduled TED
          which is generated from the scheduled LSP-DB and TED and also
          synchronize the scheduling with other PCEs in the environment by
          using PCReq message with path and resource information for the
          scheduled LSP.</t>

          <t>If no conflict exists, other PCEs SHALL send a PCRep message with
          the SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV, as well as the Bandwith Object and RRO
          back to the requesting PCE.</t>

          <t>If the LSP request can be satisfied and an available path is
          found, the stateful PCE SHALL send a PCRep Message including the
          SCHED- LSP- ATTRIBUTE TLV in the LSP Object body, as well as the
          Bandwith Object and RRO for the found path back to the PCC as a
          successful acknowledge.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="The PCUpd Message">
          <t>To provide scheduled LSP for TE-LSPs, the stateful PCE SHALL
          compute the path for the scheduled LSP carried on PCRpt message
          based on network resource availability recorded in scheduled TED
          which is generated from the scheduled LSP-DB, LSP DB and TED.</t>

          <t>If the request can be satisfied and an available path is found,
          the stateful PCE SHALL send a PCUpd Message including the SCHED-
          LSP- ATTRIBUTE TLV in the LSP Object body to the PCC Note that, the
          stateful PCE can update the Scheduled LSP parameters later as well
          based on any network events using the same PCUpd message.</t>

          <!-- removed by dhruv, as this is incorrect
          <t>If no path is found, the stateful PCE sends a PCUpd message with
          the NO Path Object. The definition of the PCUpd message to carry LSP
          objects(see [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]) is unchanged. </t> -->
        </section>

        <section title="LSP Object">
          <t>The LSP object is defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]. This
          document add an optional SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV.</t>

          <t>The presence of SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV in the LSP object
          indicates that this LSP is requesting scheduled parameters. The TLV
          MUST be present in LSP Object for each scheduled LSP carried in the
          PCReq message, the PCRpt message and the PCUpd message.</t>

          <section title="SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV">
            <t>The SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV can be included as an optional TLV
            within the LSP object for LSP scheduling for the requesting
            traffic service.</t>

            <t>This TLV SHOULD be included only if both PCEP peers have set
            the B (LSP-SCHEDULING-CAPABILITY bit) in STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY
            TLV carried in open message.</t>

            <t>The format of the SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV is shown in the
            following figure:</t>

            <figure>
              <artwork>
 0                   1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|             Type              |         Length                |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Starting Time (minutes)                 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       Duration (minutes)                      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+</artwork>
            </figure>

            <t>The type of the TLV is [TBD] and it has a fixed length of 8
            octets.</t>

            <t>The fields in the format are:<list style="hanging">
                <t hangText="Starting Time (32 bits):">This value in minutes,
                indicates when the scheduled LSP is used and the corresponding
                LSP must be setup and activated. At the expiry of this time,
                the LSP is setup. Otherwise, the LSP is inactive to include
                the possibility of the resources to be used by other services.
                The <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>

                <t hangText="Duration (32 bits):">The value in minutes,
                indicates the duration that the LSP is undertaken by a traffic
                flow and the corresponding LSP must be up to carry traffic. At
                the expiry of this time after setup, the LSP is tear down and
                deleted. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
              </list></t>

            <t>Note, that the values of starting time and duration is from the
            perspective of the PCEP peer that is sending the message, also
            note the unit of time is minutes, and thus the time spent on
            transmission on wire can be easily ignored.</t>

            <t>Editor Note: As described in
            [I-D.zhuang-teas-scheduled-resources],the encoding of the resource
            state information could also be expressed as a start time and and
            end time. Multiple periods, possibly of different lengths, may be
            associated with one reservation request, and a reservation might
            repeat on a regular cycle.</t>
          </section>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Scheduled LSP activation and deletion">
        <t>In PCC-Initiated LSP scheduling, the PCC itself MAY activate the
        scheduled LSP at the starting time. Alternatively, the stateful PCE
        MAY activate the scheduled LSP at its scheduled time by send a
        PCInitiated message.</t>

        <t>After the scheduled duration expires, the PCE shall send a PCUpd
        message with R flag set to the PCC to delete the LSP over the path, as
        well as to other PCEs to remove the scheduled LSP in the databases.
        Additionally, it shall update its scheduled LSP DB and scheduled
        TED.</t>

        <t>Note that, the stateful PCE can update the Scheduled LSP parameters
        at any time based on any network events using the PCUpd message
        including SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV in the LSP Object body.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>This document defines LSP-SCHEDULING-CAPABILITY TLV and SCHED- LSP-
      ATTRIBUTE TLV which does not add any new security concerns beyond those
      discussed in [RFC5440] and [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce].</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Manageability Consideration">
      <section title="Control of Function and Policy">
        <t>The LSP-Scheduling feature MUST BE controlled per tunnel by the
        active stateful PCE, the values for parameters like starting time,
        duration SHOULD BE configurable by customer applications and based on
        the local policy at PCE.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Information and Data Models">
        <t>[RFC7420] describes the PCEP MIB, there are no new MIB Objects for
        this document.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Liveness Detection and Monitoring">
        <t>Mechanisms defined in this document do not imply any new liveness
        detection and monitoring requirements in addition to those already
        listed in [RFC5440].</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Verify Correct Operations">
        <t>Mechanisms defined in this document do not imply any new operation
        verification requirements in addition to those already listed in
        [RFC5440].</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Requirements On Other Protocols">
        <t>Mechanisms defined in this document do not imply any new
        requirements on other protocols.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Impact On Network Operations">
        <t>Mechanisms defined in this document do not have any impact on
        network operations in addition to those already listed in
        [RFC5440].</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="IANA Considerations">
      <section title="PCEP TLV Type Indicators">
        <t>This document defines the following new PCEP TLV; IANA is requested
        to make the following allocations from this registry. <figure>
            <artwork>Value     Meaning                         Reference
 TBD  SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE            This document</artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>

      <section title="LSP-SCHEDULING-CAPABLITY">
        <t>This document requests that a registry is created to manage the
        Flags field in the STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV in the OPEN object. New
        values are to be assigned by Standards Action [RFC5226]. Each bit
        should be tracked with the following qualities: <list style="symbols">
            <t>Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significant
            bit)</t>

            <t>Capability description</t>

            <t>Defining RFC</t>
          </list></t>

        <t>The following values are defined in this document:<figure>
            <artwork>Bit    Description                                    Reference
 28    LSP-SCHEDULING-CAPABILITY (B-bit)        This document</artwork>
          </figure></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Acknowledgments">
      <t>This work has benefited from the discussions of resource scheduling
      on the mailing list and with Huaimo chen, author of [I-D.chen-pce-tts]
      since Prague meeting. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of
      Huaimo Chen. The authors of this document would also like to thank Rafal
      Szarecki,Adrian Farrel, Cyril Margaria, Xian Zhang for the review and
      comments.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.2119'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.5440'?>

      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.dhody-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth"?>

      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.zhuang-teas-scheduled-resources"?>
    </references>

    <!-- Normative -->

    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app"?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.5226'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.7420'?>
    </references>

    <section title="Scheduled LSP information synchronization">
      <t>As for a stateful PCE, it maintains a database of LSPs (LSP-DB) that
      are active in the network, so as to reveal the available network
      resources and place new LSPs more cleverly.</t>

      <t>With the scheduled LSPs, they are not activated while creation, but
      should be considered when operating future path computation. Hence, a
      scheduled LSP Database (SLSP-DB) is suggested to maintain all scheduled
      LSP information.</t>

      <t>The information of SLSP-DB MUST be shared and synchronized among all
      PCEs within the centralized network by using PCReq message, PCRep
      message with scheduled LSP information. In order to synchronize the
      scheduled LSP information in SLSP-DB among PCEs, the PCReq message and
      PCRep Message is used as described in section 4.3.1 and section
      4.3.2.</t>

      <t>To achieve the synchronization, the PCE should generate and maintain
      a scheduled TED based on LSP DB, scheduled LSP DB and TED, which is used
      to indicate the network resource availability on network nodes for LSP
      path computation.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Contributor Addresses">
      <figure>
        <artwork>   Zitao Wang
   Huawei
   101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
   Nanjing, Jiangsu  210012
   China

   Email: wangzitao@huawei.com

   Xian Zhang
   Huawei Technologies
   Research Area F3-1B,
   Huawei Industrial Base,
   Shenzhen, 518129, China

   Email: zhang.xian@huawei.com</artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>

    <!-- Informative -->
  </back>
</rfc>
