Skip to main content

IS-IS Extension for Big TLV
draft-wang-lsr-isis-big-tlv-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Aijun Wang , Huaimo Chen , Jie Dong , Changwang Lin , Gyan Mishra
Last updated 2025-07-07
Replaces draft-chen-lsr-isis-big-tlv
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-wang-lsr-isis-big-tlv-02
Network Working Group                                            A. Wang
Internet-Draft                                             China Telecom
Intended status: Standards Track                                 H. Chen
Expires: 8 January 2026                                       Individual
                                                                 J. Dong
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                                  C. Lin
                                                    New H3C Technologies
                                                               G. Mishra
                                                                 Verizon
                                                             7 July 2025

                      IS-IS Extension for Big TLV
                     draft-wang-lsr-isis-big-tlv-02

Abstract

   The IS-IS routing protocol uses TLV (Type-Length-Value) encoding in a
   variety of protocol messages.  The original IS-IS TLV definition
   allows for 255 octets of value in maximum.  This document proposes a
   solution to IS-IS extension for encoding the TLV whose value is
   bigger than 255 octets.

Requirements Language

   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 [RFC2119] [RFC8174]
   when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

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 8 January 2026.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  General Procedure Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  IS-IS Extension for Big TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Split and Glue  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Big-TLV Capability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Incremental Deployment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

1.  Introduction

   Type-Length-Value (TLV) encoding of information is widely used in
   Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) routing protocol
   messages including Link State Protocol Data Units (LSPs).  Each TLV
   defined in [ISO10589] allows for maximum of 255 octets of value (or
   say payload).  This is because the length field of the TLV is one
   octet, which has 255 as its maximum value.  When the size of the
   value of a TLV of type T (such as the Extended IS Reachability TLV of
   type 22) is bigger than 255 octets, this TLV is called a Big TLV of
   type T (or Big-TLV for short).  There is no general mechanism for
   encoding and distributing this Big-TLV in classic IS-IS.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   IS-IS has been optionally extended by which permits larger TLV value,
   in principle up to 65,535 octets due to a two-octet length field.
   However, the[RFC7356] extensions are not widely deployed, are not
   backward compatible in the sense that they use a new Protocol Data
   Unit (PDU) and new LSP types that un-extended implementations will
   ignore, and in any case do not support values so large they do not
   fit into a single packet.

   This document proposes a simple IS-IS extension for encoding and
   distributing the Big-TLV whose value parts are bigger and can't be
   accommodated in a single TLV.  This extension uses a "Container TLV".

2.  General Procedure Description

   This document describes a method that segments an original Big-TLV
   into fragmented contents, encapsulates the fragmented contents into
   one newly defined container TLV, which is transmitted via normal IS-
   IS PDU to the receiver.

   The fragment procedure happen only when the length of original Big-
   TLV exceeds the normal boundary value(255 bytes), and the results
   segmented contents should be encapsulated within the newly defined
   container TLV.

   The original Big-TLV includes sub-TLVs, or sub-sub-TLVs.  The segment
   process occurs only at the boundary of sub-TLV, or the boundary of
   sub-sub-TLV.  That is to say, one normal sub-TLV, or sub-sub-TLV
   shouldn't be splitted into several segments.

   The container TLV is defined in Section 3, which contains a length of
   fragmented content(normally less than 255 bytes); a packet identifier
   to identify the original Big-TLV that the fragmented content belongs
   to; a packet length of the original data packet; a flag field
   indicating whether the original Big-TLV includes the sub-TLV and/or
   the sub-sub TLV and the TLV/sub-TLV and sub-sub TLV types of original
   Big-TLV.

   When the receiver receives the segmented container TLV, it will
   concatenate these container TLVs to reconstruct the orginal Big TLV.

   The receiver concatenates these container TLVs only when the above
   mentioned packet identifier, TLV type, sub-TLV type and sub-sub-TLV
   type are the same.

   The concatenates procedure will end when the receiver receives all
   the segmented contents, that is to say, the length of concatenate
   packet match the original packet length that encapsulated in the
   header of the container TLV.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

3.  IS-IS Extension for Big TLV

   A new TLV, called the Container TLV, is defined.  Figure 1 shows the
   format of the new TLV in the classic [ISO10589] case.  This new TLV
   is used to carry a piece of the value of a Big-TLV of type T.

         0                   1
         0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+        -----------+
        |  Type (TBD1)  |    Length     |                   |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+              |
        |   Flag   |T2T1|    Type T0    |    |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |
        | Sub-Type T1   |Sub-Sub-Type T2|    |         Container TLV
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |        of type TBD1
        |    Length of Type T0/T1/T2    |    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |              |
        |       Identification          |    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  Value of         |
        | Piece of value of Big TLV of  |  Container TLV    |
        ~ type T (less than 247 octets) ~    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+   -----------+

                     Figure 1: Format of Container TLV

   Type (TBD1) field: 1 octet.  The type of the Container TLV, its value
   is assigned by IANA.

   Length field: 1 octet.  The length of the Value field of the
   Container TLV.

   Value field: contains a Flag field, a Type T0, T1 and T2 field
   (indicates the top TLV, sub-TLV, sub-sub-TLV type of original Big TLV
   belongs to respectively), Length of original Type T0/T1/T2, a
   Identification field and a Piece of value of Big TLV.  (Piece field
   for short).

   Flag field: 1 octet.  Defines flag for the container TLV.  T1(bit 7),
   T2(bit 6) are defined now. when T1/T2 are all unset, it indicates the
   Big-TLV belong to one top IS-IS TLV; when only T1 bit is set, it
   indicates the Big-TLV belong to sub-TLV; when both T1 and T2 bit are
   set, i indicates the Big-TLV belongs to sub-sub-TLV.  T2 bit can be
   set only when T1 bit is set at the same time.

   Type T0、T1、T2 fields: All are 1 octet, Indicates the Type/sub-Type/
   sub-sub-Type of the Big-TLV that is being transported in this
   Container TLV.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   Length of Type T0/T1/T2: 2 octets.  Actual lengths of Big-TLV.

   Identification field: 2 octets.  Together with Type(T0/T1/T2), can
   identify unique Big-TLV that each container TLV belongs to.  The
   sender of Big TLV should keep the identification filed same when it
   fragments the Big-TLV into several pieces which encapsulated within
   the container TLV.  The receiver of the Big-TLV should assemble the
   container TLV with the same identification field and Type(T0/T1/T2)
   into the original Big-TLV.

   Piece field: A piece of the value of the Big- TLV of type T0/T1/T2
   that is being transported in this Container TLV.

   When a node has a Big-TLV of type T0/T1/T2 to be originated, it
   splits the value of the Big-TLV into a number of pieces, from Piece 1
   to Piece n.  Each piece from Piece 1 to Piece n is less than 247
   octets.

   This is illustrated in Figure 2.

               0                   1
               0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
              |  Type (T)     |    Length     |
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+
              | Piece 1 (less than 252 octets)|    |
              ~                               ~    |
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |
              | Piece 2 (less than 252 octets)|    |
              ~                               ~    Bigger than
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    255 octets
              ~               :               ~    |
              ~               .               ~    |
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |
              | Piece n (less than 252 octets)|    |
              ~                               ~    |
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+

    Figure 2: Big-TLV of type T with value field bigger than 255 octets

   Each piece carries a subset of entries in the Big-TLV.  An entry is
   an existing sub-TLV or structure.  One entry MUST NOT be split across
   pieces.  The Big-TLV is split in entries boundaries, not octets
   boundaries.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   The node originates n TLVs for the Big-TLV of type T.  These TLVs are
   the n new TLVs of type TBD1, each of which has a normal payload.  The
   node advertises each of these TLVs to its neighbors according to the
   normal IS-IS procedure.  Figure 3 shows the encoding of the Big TLV
   with type T in Figure 2.

         0                   1
         0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+        -----------+
        |  Type (TBD1)  |    Length     |                   |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+              |
        |   Flag   |T2T1|    Type T0    |    |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |
        | Sub-Type T1   |Sub-Sub-Type T2|    |         Container TLV
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |        of type TBD1
        |    Length of Type T0/T1/T2    |    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |              |
        |       Identification          |    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  Value of         |
        | Piece 1(less than 247 octets) |  Container TLV    |
        ~                               ~    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+   -----------+

        ~               :               ~
        ~               .               ~

         0                   1
         0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+        -----------+
        |  Type (TBD1)  |    Length     |                   |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+              |
        |   Flag   |T2T1|    Type T0    |    |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |
        | Sub-Type T1   |Sub-Sub-Type T2|    |         Container TLV
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |        of type TBD1
        |    Length of Type T0/T1/T2    |    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    |              |
        |       Identification          |    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  Value of         |
        | Piece n(less than 247 octets) |  Container TLV    |
        ~                               ~    |              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  --+   -----------+

              Figure 3: Encoding value bigger than 255 octets

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   For each of the n pieces of the value of the Big-TLV, a Container TLV
   of type TBD1 carries the piece.  Container TLV 1 contains Piece 1 of
   the value of the Big-TLV; Container TLV 2 contains Piece 2 of the
   value of the Big-TLV; ...; Container TLV n contains Piece n of the
   value of the Big-TLV.

   If a node supports the extension (i.e., Container TLV), the node
   understands each piece of the value of the Big-TLV received.  Each of
   the n Container TLVs having Type (T) contains a piece of the Big-TLV
   value in its Piece field.

4.  Split and Glue

   This section discusses a couple of ways in which a Big-TLV is split
   into pieces at sending and the pieces are glued at receiving.

   When a TLV of type T is too big at an originating node, this Big-TLV
   is split into a sequence of pieces.  Each piece carries a subset of
   entries in the Big-TLV.  An entry is an existing Sub-TLV or
   structure.

   if there is only one Big-TLV of type T, the node originates container
   TLVs with type T containing the pieces, and set the identification
   field the same value in each container TLV.

   When there are multiple Big-TLVs of type T, the node originates
   multiple sequences of container TLVs, with each sequence of the
   container TLVs has unique different identification field.

   For example, suppose that a node has a Big-TLV of type T = 22 as
   shown in Figure 4.  This TLV is too Big and split into two pieces
   piece 1 and piece 2 at boundary between Sub-TLV K and K+1.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

          0                   1
          0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
         |  Type (T=22)  |    Length     |
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  ----+-----------+
         |system ID for neighbor 10.2.2.2|      |           |
         +         (6 octets)            +      |           |
         |                               |      |           |
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |           |
         |        Metric (continue)      |    Piece 1       |
         +               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    < 247 octets  |
         |               |sub-TLVs-length|      |           |
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |       Bigger than
         |          sub-TLV 1            |      |       255 octets
         :             :                 :      |           |
         :          sub-TLV K            :      |           |
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  ----+           |
         |          sub-TLV K+1          |      |           |
         :             :                 :    Piece 2       |
         :          sub-TLV N            :      |           |
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  ----+-----------+

    Figure 4: Example Big TLV of type T=22 with Value Field > 255 Octets

   For this Big-TLV of type T = 22, the node originates two container
   TLV with type T = 22 containing the two pieces (i.e., piece 1 and
   piece 2) directly.  The container TLV is illustrated in Figure 5.

    0                   1
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  -----------------------+
   |  Type (TBD1)  |    Length     |                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ------------+           |
   |   Flag    |0|0|    Type 22    |             |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             |           |
   | Sub-Type 0    |Sub-Sub-Type 0 |             |         Container TLV
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             |        of type TBD1
   |    Length of Type T0/T1/T2    |             |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             |           |
   |      Identification(ID X)     |             |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ -----+      |           |
   |system ID for neighbor 10.2.2.2|      |      |           |
   +         (6 octets)            +      |      |           |
   |                               |      |      |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |      |           |
   |        Metric (continue)      |      | Value of         |
   +               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      | Container TLV    |
   |               |sub-TLVs-length|      |      |           |

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |      |           |
   |          sub-TLV 1            |   Piece 1   |           |
   :             :                 :      |      |           |
   :          sub-TLV K            :      |      |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  ----+------------------+

    0                   1
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  -----------------------+
   |  Type (TBD1)  |    Length     |                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ------------+           |
   |   Flag    |0|0|    Type 22    |             |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             |           |
   | Sub-Type 0    |Sub-Sub-Type 0 |             |         Container TLV
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             |        of type TBD1
   |    Length of Type T0/T1/T2    |             |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             |           |
   |      Identification(ID X)     |             |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ -----+      |           |
   |system ID for neighbor 10.2.2.2|      |      |           |
   +         (6 octets)            +      |      |           |
   |                               |      |      |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |      |           |
   |        Metric (continue)      |      | Value of         |
   +               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      | Container TLV    |
   |               |sub-TLVs-length|      |      |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |      |           |
   |          sub-TLV K+1          |   Piece 2   |           |
   :             :                 :      |      |           |
   :          sub-TLV N            :      |      |           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  ----+------------------+

          Figure 5: Example Encoding of Value Field > 255 Octets

   After receiving the container TLV with type T = 22 and the same
   identification filed(ID X), the node can glue the piece 1 and piece 2
   directly accordingly to the F flag that indicate the first first
   piece and other sequences piece.

   Alternatively, when a node has multiple Big-TLVs of type T=22, for
   each Big-TLV of type T split into a sequence of pieces, the node
   originates a sequence of container TLVs with type T and unique
   identification value for each sequence.

   After receiving the container TLV with type T = 22, and different
   sequence of container TLVs, the node can glue the piece 1 and piece 2
   for each sequence through the same identification value.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   The sliced container TLVs of one Big-TLV SHOULD be encapsulated
   within one LSP if all the lengths of the container TLV can fit into
   one LSP.  If such condition can't be met, these sliced container TLVs
   can be put into different LSPs.

   If the container TLVs of one Big-TLV locate in different LSPs, the
   receiver SHOULD wait until it receives all these updated LSPs, then
   begin the concatenating process and SPF calculation.  Such process is
   similar as the general incremental updates of LSPs.

5.  Big-TLV Capability

   A new sub-TLV, called Big-TLV Capability sub-TLV, is defined in the
   Router Capability TLV [RFC7981].  A node advertising this sub-TLV
   indicates that the node supports the Big-TLV.  The format of the sub-
   TLV is shown in Figure 6.

       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 (TBD2) |   Length (1)  |     Flags      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Figure 6: Big-TLV Capability sub-TLV

   Type (TBD2) field: 1 octet.  The type of the Big-TLV Capability sub-
   TLV, its value is assigned by IANA.

   Length field: 1 octet.  Its value is 1.

   Flags field: 1 octet.  The field of flags.  No flag is defined now.

   A node supporting the Big-TLV MUST advertise this sub-TLV in a Router
   Capability TLV.

6.  Incremental Deployment

   For a network using IS-IS, users can deploy the extension for Big-TLV
   in a part of the network step by step.  The network has some nodes
   supporting the extension (or say new nodes for short) and the other
   nodes not supporting the extension (or say old nodes for short)
   before the extension is deployed in the entire network.

   The pieces of the Big-TLV, advertised in the Container TLVs, will
   only be understood by the new nodes and will be ignored by the old
   nodes.  The originator of the Big-TLV MUST consider the above
   properties when splitting the Big-TLV into multiple pieces.

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                [Page 10]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   If all the nodes need to have the same new information for using the
   new information, every node needs to check if all the nodes support
   the Big-TLV capability which is distributed by the nodes supporting
   it.  If all the nodes support it, every node uses the new
   information.

   If it is not required that all the nodes must have the same new
   information for using the new information, the nodes supporting the
   Big-TLV capability can use the new information, the nodes not
   supporting the Big-TLV capability ignore the new information.

7.  Security Considerations

   The mechanism described in this document does not raise any new
   security issues for the IS-IS protocols.

8.  Acknowledgement

   TBD

9.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to make a new allocation in the "IS-IS TLV
   Codepoint Registry" under the registry name "IS-IS TLV Codepoints" as
   follows:

     +=========+==========+=====+=====+=====+======+==============+
     |  Type   | Name     | IIH | LSP | SNP |Purge |  reference   |
     +=========+==========+=====+=====+=====+======+==============+
     |  TBD1   | Container|  Y  |  Y  |  N  |  N   |This document |
     +---------+----------+-----+-----+-----+------+--------------+

   IANA is requested to make a new allocation under the registry name
   "IS-IS Sub-TLVs for IS-IS Router CAPABILITY TLV" as follows:

     +======+==================+===+=====+===+=====+==============+
     |Value |  Description     |IIH| LSP |SNP|Purge|  reference   |
     +======+==================+===+=====+===+=====+==============+
     | TBD2 |Big-TLV Capability| N |  Y  | N |  N  |This document |
     +------+------------------+---+-----+---+-----+--------------+

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                [Page 11]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   [ISO10589] ISO, "Information technology -- Telecommunications and
              information exchange between systems -- Intermediate
              System to Intermediate System intra-domain routing
              information exchange protocol for use in conjunction with
              the protocol for providing the connectionless-mode network
              service (ISO 8473)", ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second Edition,
              November 2002.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC7981]  Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M. Chen, "IS-IS Extensions
              for Advertising Router Information", RFC 7981,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7981, October 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7981>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

10.2.  Informative References

   [RFC7356]  Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and Y. Yang, "IS-IS Flooding
              Scope Link State PDUs (LSPs)", RFC 7356,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7356, September 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7356>.

Authors' Addresses

   Aijun Wang
   China Telecom
   Beiqijia Town, Changping District
   Beijing
   102209
   China
   Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn

   Huaimo Chen
   Individual
   Boston, MA,
   United States of America
   Email: hchen.ietf@gmail.com

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                [Page 12]
Internet-Draft                IS-IS big TLV                    July 2025

   Jie Dong
   Huawei Technologies
   Beijing
   China
   Email: jie.dong@huawei.com

   Changwang
   New H3C Technologies
   China
   Email: linchangwang.04414@h3c.com

   Gyan S. Mishra
   Verizon
   13101 Columbia Pike
   Silver Spring,  MD 20904
   United States of America
   Phone: 301 502-1347
   Email: hayabusagsm@gmail.com

Wang, et al.             Expires 8 January 2026                [Page 13]