<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.24 (Ruby 3.2.3) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-zzd-pce-sr-policy-scheduling-00" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.28.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="PCE SR Policy Scheduling">PCE SR Policy Extensions for Path Scheduling</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-zzd-pce-sr-policy-scheduling-00"/>
    <author initials="L." surname="Zhang" fullname="Li Zhang" role="editor">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Beiqing Road</street>
          <city>Beijing</city>
          <country>China</country>
        </postal>
        <email>zhangli344@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="J." surname="Dong" fullname="Jie Dong">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <email>jie.dong@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="T." surname="Zhou" fullname="Tianran Zhou">
      <organization>Huawei</organization>
      <address>
        <email>zhoutianran@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2025" month="March" day="03"/>
    <area>General</area>
    <workgroup>PCE</workgroup>
    <keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 43?>

<t>Segment Routing (SR) policy enables instantiation of an ordered list of segments with a specific intent for traffic steering. When using SR policy in a time-variant network, delivering the time-variant information associated with paths is necessary in some scenarios.</t>
      <t>This document proposes extensions to PCE SR Policy to deliver the schedule information of candidate path (segment list) and its associated attributes.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 49?>

<section anchor="intro">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t><xref target="RFC9657"/> introduces a set of time-variant network use cases where the topology of the network changes predictably. When the networks uses traditional routing protocols, it takes these topology changes as unexpected events and may cause and packet loss. However, the topology changes of these networks can be predicted in advance, therefore some measures can be taken in advance to prevent the packet loss. With this idea, <xref target="I-D.ietf-tvr-requirements"/> describes the requirements of using the time-variant information in a network. In <xref section="3.4.1" sectionFormat="of" target="I-D.ietf-tvr-requirements"/>, it describes the centralized routing scenarios with time-variant information, in which the network entities receive the time variable information and traffic forwarding rules directly from a logically centralized source(an Orchestrator or network controller). The time-variant information is especially essential when there is a risk that a logically centralized source may loses connectivity with the network entities.</t>
      <t><xref target="RFC8664"/>specifies extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) that allow a stateful PCE to compute and initiate Traffic-Engineering (TE) paths, as well as a Path Computation Client (PCC) to request a path subject to certain constraints and optimization criteria in SR networks. <xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp"/> extends <xref target="RFC8664"/> to support signaling SR Policy Candidate Paths as PCEP LSPs and to signal candidate paths of the SR Policy. It signals SR Policy Candidate Paths as PCEP LSPs and signal Candidate Path membership in an SR Policy by means of the Association mechanism. The segment lists of each candidate path and their associated attributes are signaled by the Path Attribute Object defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-multipath"/>. However, when using SR Policy in a time-variant network, it can't advertise the schedule information associated with paths.</t>
      <t>This document proposes extensions to PCE SR Policy to carry the schedule information of candidate paths/segment lists.</t>
      <section anchor="requirements-language">
        <name>Requirements Language</name>
        <t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
        <?line -18?>

</section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="motivation">
      <name>Motivation</name>
      <t>Most of the time-variant network use cases using PCE SR Policy could benefit from this work. In some cases, carrying the time-variant information with SR Policy is essential.</t>
      <t>This section describes the cases that requires extending SR Policy with schedule information.</t>
      <section anchor="network-with-discontinuous-links">
        <name>Network with Discontinuous Links</name>
        <t>In some time-variant network cases, the links between the network entities and network controller may very weak or intermittent, this is very typical in Resource Preservation and Dynamic Reachability network<xref target="RFC9657"/>. In these cases, Real-time SR policy advertising (before changes occur) may not be timely. For example, when a link of an old path is about to be disconnected, the network controller is going to advertise a new path to the headend. However, the link between the headend and the network controller is not available. As a result, the new path cannot be advertised in time, causing packet loss.</t>
        <t>Therefore, in these cases, once the links between the headend and network controller are available, the controller need to advertise the paths with schedule information for a period in the future to the headend. Then the headend could determine valid paths in the future based on the schedule information of SR policy.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="network-with-frequent-topology-changes">
        <name>Network with Frequent Topology Changes</name>
        <t>There are also some time-variant network cases that topology changes frequently. This is very typical when the number of network entities is very large (For example, a Dynamic Reachability network with hundreds or thousands of nodes). In this kind of time-variant network, a path form one network entity to another changes frequently, sometimes it can only be maintained for a few minutes or seconds.</t>
        <t>Considering that there are multiple paths in a network that computed by the controller, the SR Policies with candidate paths may be advertised to the headend every few seconds. It poses great changeling to the network controller. However, using schedule information could advertise several paths at a time, which greatly mitigate the pressure of network controllers.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="schedule-information-in-pce-sr-policy">
      <name>Schedule Information in PCE SR Policy</name>
    </section>
    <section anchor="schedule-information-tlv">
      <name>Schedule Information TLV</name>
      <t><xref target="RFC8934"/> defines the SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE and SCHED-PD-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV to indicate the LSP is a non-periodical scheduling LSP or a periodical scheduling LSP.
However, it can't express a LSP with complex schedules. On the one hand, the format of these TLVs are very simple, each TLV can only descripts one duration or a periodical duration, on the other hand, it requires that only one SCHED-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be present in the LSP object, which means each scheduling LSP can only have one duration or periodical duration.</t>
      <t>Therefore, the extensions of <xref target="RFC8934"/> could be applicable in some cases with simple schedules, but it is not flexible enough to be applied in the cases with complex schedules(such as the cases listed in <xref target="motivation"/>). A more general format of Schedule Information TLV is defined in this draft to cover different kind of cases.</t>
      <t>The schedule information TLV indicates one or more valid durations. The format of Schedule Information TLV is shown as follows:</t>
      <figure anchor="ref-to-fig1">
        <name>Schedule Information TLV</name>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 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             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
/                        Schedules                              /
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
]]></artwork>
      </figure>
      <t>Type: TBD1</t>
      <t>Length: the size of the value field in octets.</t>
      <t>Schedules: one or more schedules, each schedule indicates the duration when the candidate path (segment list) is active. The format of each schedule is shown as follows:</t>
      <figure anchor="ref-to-fig2">
        <name>Format of Schedules</name>
        <artwork><![CDATA[
 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                           Schedule-id                         |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Flags  |S|P|R|    Length     |          Reserved             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                          Start Time                           |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                     Start Time(Continue)                      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                       End Time/Duration                       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                   End Time/Duration(Continue)                 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                   Recurrence count/Bound(Optional)            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                   Recurrence count/Bound(Optional)            |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                     Frequency (Optional)                      |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

]]></artwork>
      </figure>
      <t>Schedule-id: 32-bit value, the unique identifier to distinguish each schedule within a SR Policy, this value is allocated by the SR Policy generator.</t>
      <t>Flags: 8 bits, currently only 3 bits are used, the other bits are reserved.</t>
      <t>Length: 8 bits, indicates the length of this schedule in octets.</t>
      <t>S (Schedule type): one-bit flag to indicate the type of a schedule. If S=0, it indicates the schedule only has one instance, the Recurrence Count/Bound, Frequency and Interval field should not be included in the sub-TLV; If S=1, it indicates the schedule has multiple instances, the Recurrence Count/Bound, Frequency and Interval field should be included.</t>
      <t>P (Period type): one-bit flag to indicate the description type of a period. if P=1, then the period is described by a start time filed and an end time field; If P =0, then the period is described by a start time field and a duration time field.</t>
      <t>R (Recurrence bound type): one-bit flag to indicate the how to determine whether the recurrence is end. if R=1, then the end of recurrence is determined by a detail timepoint; If R = 0, then the end of the recurrence is determined by the number of occurrences.</t>
      <t>Start Time: 64-bit value, the number of seconds since the epoch, it indicates when the candidate path (segment list) and its associated attributes start to take effect.</t>
      <t>End Time/Duration: 64-bit value, if the flag P=1, then it is the number of seconds since the epoch, it indicates when the candidate path (segment list) and its associated attributes becomes ineffective. If the flag P=0, then it is the number of seconds since the Start Time, it indicates how long the candidate path (segment list) and its associated attributes are effective.</t>
      <t>Recurrence Count/Bound(optional): 64-bit value, this field <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be included when the flag P is set to 1. When the flag R=0, then this field indicates the max number of occurrences. For example, if it is set to 2, then the schedule will repeat twice with the specified Frequency and Interval. When the flag R=1, then tis field indicates the bounded timepoint of recurrence, it is descripted by the number of seconds since the epoch.</t>
      <t>Frequency(optional): 32-bit value, this field should be included when the flag S is set to 1. It is the numbers of seconds since the Start Time of an instance to the Start Time of next instance. This field indicates the recurrence frequency for all the instance of this schedule.</t>
      <section anchor="candidate-paths-with-schedule">
        <name>Candidate Paths with Schedule</name>
        <t>As described in <xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp"/>, SR Policy is represented by a new type of PCEP Association, called the SR Policy Association. The SR Candidate Paths of an SR Policy are represented by the PCEP LSPs within the same SRPA.</t>
        <t>When applying schedules to a Candidate Path of an SR Policy, the LSP Object<xref target="RFC8231"/> is required to be extended to support the Schedule Information TLV. The Schedule Information TLV could be an optional TLV present in the LSP Object.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="segment-lists-with-schedule">
        <name>Segment Lists with Schedule</name>
        <t>When there are multiple segment lists within an SR Policy Candidate Paht, <xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-multipath"/> defines the Path Attribute object(PATH-ATTRIB) to carry per-path information. When applying schedules to a Segment List, the PATH-ATTRIB object is required to be extended to support the Schedule Information TLV. The Schedule Information TLV could be an optional TLV present in the LSP Object.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="procedures">
      <name>Procedures</name>
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>IANA maintains a sub-registry "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" in the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry.  IANA is requested to make the following allocations from this sub-registry.</t>
      <table>
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th align="left">Value</th>
            <th align="left">Description</th>
            <th align="left">Reference</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td align="left">TBD1</td>
            <td align="left">Schedule Information (SI) TLV</td>
            <td align="left">This document</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-combined-references">
      <name>References</name>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-tvr-requirements" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tvr-requirements-04" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-tvr-requirements.xml">
          <front>
            <title>TVR (Time-Variant Routing) Requirements</title>
            <author fullname="Daniel King" initials="D." surname="King">
              <organization>Lancaster University</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Luis M. Contreras" initials="L. M." surname="Contreras">
              <organization>Telefonica</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Brian Sipos" initials="B." surname="Sipos">
              <organization>JHU/APL</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Li Zhang" initials="L." surname="Zhang">
              <organization>Huawei</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="13" month="September" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Time-Variant Routing (TVR) refers to calculating a path or subpath through a network where the time of message transmission (or receipt) is part of the overall route computation. This means that, all things being equal, a TVR computation might produce different results depending on the time that the computation is performed without other detectable changes to the network topology or other cost functions associated with the route This document introduces requirements where TVR computations could improve message exchange in a network.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-tvr-requirements-04"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8664" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8664" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8664.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing</title>
            <author fullname="S. Sivabalan" initials="S." surname="Sivabalan"/>
            <author fullname="C. Filsfils" initials="C." surname="Filsfils"/>
            <author fullname="J. Tantsura" initials="J." surname="Tantsura"/>
            <author fullname="W. Henderickx" initials="W." surname="Henderickx"/>
            <author fullname="J. Hardwick" initials="J." surname="Hardwick"/>
            <date month="December" year="2019"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Segment Routing (SR) enables any head-end node to select any path without relying on a hop-by-hop signaling technique (e.g., LDP or RSVP-TE). It depends only on "segments" that are advertised by link-state Interior Gateway Protocols (IGPs). An SR path can be derived from a variety of mechanisms, including an IGP Shortest Path Tree (SPT), an explicit configuration, or a Path Computation Element (PCE). This document specifies extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) that allow a stateful PCE to compute and initiate Traffic-Engineering (TE) paths, as well as a Path Computation Client (PCC) to request a path subject to certain constraints and optimization criteria in SR networks.</t>
              <t>This document updates RFC 8408.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8664"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8664"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-22" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing (SR) Policy Candidate Paths</title>
            <author fullname="Mike Koldychev" initials="M." surname="Koldychev">
              <organization>Ciena Corporation</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Siva Sivabalan" initials="S." surname="Sivabalan">
              <organization>Ciena Corporation</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Samuel Sidor" initials="S." surname="Sidor">
              <organization>Cisco Systems, Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Colby Barth" initials="C." surname="Barth">
              <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Shuping Peng" initials="S." surname="Peng">
              <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Hooman Bidgoli" initials="H." surname="Bidgoli">
              <organization>Nokia</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="25" month="February" year="2025"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Segment Routing (SR) allows a node to steer a packet flow along any path. SR Policy is an ordered list of segments (i.e., instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated called a headend node. An SR Policy is made of one or more candidate paths. This document specifies the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) extension to signal candidate paths of the SR Policy. Additionally, this document updates RFC 8231 to allow stateful bring up of an SR Label Switched Path (LSP), without using the path computation request and reply messages. This document is applicable to both Segment Routing over MPLS (SR-MPLS) and Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6).</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp-22"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-pce-multipath" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-multipath-12" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-pce-multipath.xml">
          <front>
            <title>PCEP Extensions for Signaling Multipath Information</title>
            <author fullname="Mike Koldychev" initials="M." surname="Koldychev">
              <organization>Ciena Corporation</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Siva Sivabalan" initials="S." surname="Sivabalan">
              <organization>Ciena Corporation</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Tarek Saad" initials="T." surname="Saad">
              <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Vishnu Pavan Beeram" initials="V. P." surname="Beeram">
              <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Hooman Bidgoli" initials="H." surname="Bidgoli">
              <organization>Nokia</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Bhupendra Yadav" initials="B." surname="Yadav">
              <organization>Ciena</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Shuping Peng" initials="S." surname="Peng">
              <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Gyan Mishra" initials="G. S." surname="Mishra">
              <organization>Verizon Inc.</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="8" month="October" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Certain traffic engineering path computation problems require solutions that consist of multiple traffic paths, that together form a solution. Returning just one single traffic path does not provide a valid solution. This document defines mechanisms to encode multiple paths for a single set of objectives and constraints. This allows encoding of multiple Segment Lists per Candidate Path within a Segment Routing Policy. The new PCEP mechanisms are meant to be generic, where possible, to allow for future re-use outside of SR Policy. The new PCEP mechanisms are applicable to both stateless and stateful PCEP.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-pce-multipath-12"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
            <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
            <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC9657" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9657" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.9657.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Time-Variant Routing (TVR) Use Cases</title>
            <author fullname="E. Birrane, III" initials="E." surname="Birrane, III"/>
            <author fullname="N. Kuhn" initials="N." surname="Kuhn"/>
            <author fullname="Y. Qu" initials="Y." surname="Qu"/>
            <author fullname="R. Taylor" initials="R." surname="Taylor"/>
            <author fullname="L. Zhang" initials="L." surname="Zhang"/>
            <date month="October" year="2024"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document introduces use cases where Time-Variant Routing (TVR) computations (i.e., routing computations that take into consideration time-based or scheduled changes to a network) could improve routing protocol convergence and/or network performance.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9657"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9657"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8934" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8934" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8934.xml">
          <front>
            <title>PCE Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Label Switched Path (LSP) Scheduling with Stateful PCE</title>
            <author fullname="H. Chen" initials="H." role="editor" surname="Chen"/>
            <author fullname="Y. Zhuang" initials="Y." role="editor" surname="Zhuang"/>
            <author fullname="Q. Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu"/>
            <author fullname="D. Ceccarelli" initials="D." surname="Ceccarelli"/>
            <date month="October" year="2020"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document defines a set of extensions to the stateful PCE Communication Protocol (PCEP) to enable Label Switched Path (LSP) path computation, activation, setup, and deletion based on scheduled time intervals for the LSP and the actual network resource usage in a centralized network environment, as stated in RFC 8413.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8934"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8934"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8231" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231" xml:base="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8231.xml">
          <front>
            <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE</title>
            <author fullname="E. Crabbe" initials="E." surname="Crabbe"/>
            <author fullname="I. Minei" initials="I." surname="Minei"/>
            <author fullname="J. Medved" initials="J." surname="Medved"/>
            <author fullname="R. Varga" initials="R." surname="Varga"/>
            <date month="September" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path computations in response to Path Computation Client (PCC) requests.</t>
              <t>Although PCEP explicitly makes no assumptions regarding the information available to the PCE, it also makes no provisions for PCE control of timing and sequence of path computations within and across PCEP sessions. This document describes a set of extensions to PCEP to enable stateful control of MPLS-TE and GMPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via PCEP.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8231"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8231"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
    </references>
    <?line 202?>



  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
