Hi Robert, One thing I would add to this discussion is to consider bandwidth when you’re thinking through various scenarios.
Consider a TE policy that aims to satisfy a BW demand(s) where the best path is the fewest number of pwr-grps and the pwr-grp power value is a representation of power efficiency for the group. Hth, --Colby From: Tony Li <[email protected]> on behalf of Tony Li <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, August 2, 2025 at 8:20 PM To: Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> Cc: Acee Lindem <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO <[email protected]>, Raul Arco (Nokia) <[email protected]>, Ron Bonica <[email protected]>, lsr <[email protected]> Subject: [Lsr] Re: New Version Notification for draft-many-lsr-power-group-00.txt Hi Robert, > If shutting down the link or lc requires some central management station it > does change the full design (perhaps simplifies it vastly) where all of the > optimizations can be centrally managed perhaps to varying degrees. Shutting down a link does not require centralized management action. It is quite sufficient to coordinate it between the routers on the ends of the link. Note that one can also conceive of a situation where there is a unilateral, ungraceful shutdown too. That requires zero coordination. T _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
