Hi Adrian, all,
I think that the approach is for what purpose we need the compute metrics,
rather than who will make use of them (i.e. CATS, ALTO, etc).
In our view we need compute-related metrics for the entire service lifecycle:
instantiation, traffic steering, assurance, migration, etc. So
It is not obvious to me that the metrics for service placement are at
all tied to the metrics for isntance selection for client traffic. For
example, service placement may want to know about the capacity and type
details of the physical server. Client traffic direction generally does
not
Hi Joel, all,
Please, see in-line
Best regards
Luis
De: Cats En nombre de Joel Halpern
Enviado el: jueves, 2 de noviembre de 2023 19:04
Para: Jordi Ros Giralt ; Linda Dunbar
; c...@ietf.org; alto@ietf.org
CC: i...@ietf.org
Asunto: Re: [Cats] [Idr] New draft on joint exposure of network and
So, my view is that CATS is specifically chartered to look at these metrics.
I think the metrics could equally be applied in ALTO (as I said at IETF-117
in the ALTO WG meeting).
I had hoped that we might hold an interim to discuss metrics, but progress
has been slow.
That said, the CATS list
Thanks Linda for your comments. Find my responses below:
> Your draft describes two aspects of the service performance
> impacted by the Computing: Service Deployment and Service (Path)
> Selection. Those two should be separated, as the Service Deployment
> belongs to the OpsArea, and the
There are, as far as I can tell, two very valid and very different
approaches to service selection / traffic direction. It can be done by
the application, or it can be done by the operator edge. CATS is
chartered to address the operator-based approach. Applications clearly
can chose to make
Thanks Linda.
These metrics can be common to a variety of use cases. That is, the same common
metrics can be used to support the CATS use cases (exposure to the ingress
point) or (as suggested by this draft) to support service providers and
applications to make service deployment and selection
