Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft)
Hi Vijay, Happy New Year! No problem at all. We will wait for the chair review and submit a new version based on that. Thanks! Best, Kai 2021-01-12 22:33:33"Vijay Gurbani" wrote: Dear Kai: Happy new year. I am in the process of doing a chair review of path-vector and unified-props. My suggestion is that the nits can be addressed after I post my chair review on the mailing list. I am reviewing unified-props this week, so I will get to path-vector next week. Thanks, - vijay On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:39 AM wrote: Hi Vijay, How do you do? We have fixed most of the IDNits errors/warnings with a new revision -14. The remaining warnings are: 1. IDNits identifes [TBD] as references but we are using them in examples as placeholders for content length values. 2. IDNits thinks the version of [I-D.yang-alto-deliver-functions-over-networks] is -00 but the latest version as we used in the draft is -01. How do you suggest we proceed here? Do you think we can submit -14 right now? Or we should wait for your review on -13? Thanks! Best, Kai -Original Messages- From:kai...@scu.edu.cn Sent Time:2021-01-12 17:46:53 (Tuesday) To: "Qin Wu" Cc: "IETF ALTO" Subject: Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) Hi Qin, Thanks for the notification! I will fix the IDNits errors as soon as possible. Best, Kai 2021-01-12 09:45:08"Qin Wu" wrote: Hi, authors of path-vector: I haven’t seen you addressed IDnits errors raised by Vijay below: https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13.txt Please reply to Vijay and confirm whether there are anything missing or open issues which haven’t been closed. -Qin (With chair hat on) 发件人: alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Vijay Gurbani 发送时间: 2020年12月2日 1:36 收件人: IETF ALTO 主题: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) All: I have started the shepherd review of path-vector The review is below. The token is with me to do a chair/shepherd review of the draft. With the semester coming to a close and grading to do, etc., I have reserved the week starting Dec-16 to do the shepherd review of the draft. In the meantime, please go through the draft shepherd writeup and let me know if I have erred anywhere. Thanks, - vijay - Shepherd writeup for draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13 1. Summary. The document shepherd is Vijay K. Gurbani, and the responsible area director is Martin Duke. The document is a Standards Track document, targeted as a Proposed Standard. The WG has chosen the requested publication type since this draft extends the base ALTO protocol in a normative manner. Specifically, the document seeks to extend the base ALTO protocol (RFC 7285) to provide the concept of "Abstract Network Elements" (ANE). ANEs are an abstraction of physical network components --- routers, etc. --- that handle (switch) packets. An application whose performance may be impacted by a particular traversal path in the network may wish to consult the ANEs to determine an optimized path to the destination. This draft is a major conceptual advance in the abstractions provided by the base ALTO protocol. 2. Review and consensus. This work is mature. It started off as an individual submission in March 2015, and was adopted as a WG deliverable in May 2017. A detailed review of this draft was provided early on by Sabine Randriamasy [1,2,3] shortly after it was adopted. Version -04 was further reviewed by Danny Perez [4] and Qiao Xiang [5] in 2018, and the work progressed appreciably between 2018 and 2019, resulting in the release of -09 in November 2019. A WGLC was initiated on Sep-28-2020, and a review was provided by Qiao Xiang [6] and Luis Contreras [7] on version -11. Version -12 included the comments from Qiao and Luis, with version -13 following with some minor revisions. Earlier versions of path-vector have been implemented (without the integration of unified-props); the implementation was used in a super computing conference demonstration for OpenFlow-based networks [8]. The latest version of path-vector is being implemented and will be open-sourced on GitHub [9]. The shepherd has an action item to review version -13. 3. Intellectual property All of the authors have confirmed with the shephered that they are not aware of any IPR filed with respect to the draft. 4. Other points IDNits reports 1 error, 7 warnings, and 2 comments. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/IQ0WwgWewFKJkvzZSIQRhkiN-hc/ [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/4wa_kXE4GUrigZ33TBCVVuwBuiw/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/GGroJgfL5XGuH1ydWOLmISCPMKY/ [4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/HSGkZ2o4JvneiiYiVSGcCZjDVSQ/ [5] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/qnIBXzFEiYxMDm9kvHLH53qbn_Y/ [6] https://mailarchive.ietf.or
Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft)
Dear Kai: Happy new year. I am in the process of doing a chair review of path-vector and unified-props. My suggestion is that the nits can be addressed after I post my chair review on the mailing list. I am reviewing unified-props this week, so I will get to path-vector next week. Thanks, - vijay On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:39 AM wrote: > > Hi Vijay, > > > How do you do? We have fixed most of the IDNits errors/warnings with a new > revision -14. The remaining warnings are: > > > 1. IDNits identifes [TBD] as references but we are using them in examples > as placeholders for content length values. > > 2. IDNits thinks the version of > [I-D.yang-alto-deliver-functions-over-networks] is -00 but the latest > version as we used in the draft is -01. > > > How do you suggest we proceed here? Do you think we can submit -14 right > now? Or we should wait for your review on -13? > > > Thanks! > > > Best, > > Kai > > > -Original Messages- > *From:*kai...@scu.edu.cn > *Sent Time:*2021-01-12 17:46:53 (Tuesday) > *To:* "Qin Wu" > *Cc:* "IETF ALTO" > *Subject:* Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) > > Hi Qin, > > > Thanks for the notification! I will fix the IDNits errors as soon as possible. > > Best, > Kai > > 2021-01-12 09:45:08"Qin Wu" wrote: > > Hi, authors of path-vector: > > I haven’t seen you addressed IDnits errors raised by Vijay below: > > > https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13.txt > > Please reply to Vijay and confirm whether there are anything missing or > open issues which haven’t been closed. > > > > -Qin (With chair hat on) > > *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *代表 *Vijay Gurbani > *发送时间:* 2020年12月2日 1:36 > *收件人:* IETF ALTO > *主题:* [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) > > > > All: I have started the shepherd review of path-vector The review is > below. > > The token is with me to do a chair/shepherd review of the draft. With the > semester coming to a close and grading to do, etc., I have reserved the > week starting Dec-16 to do the shepherd review of the draft. > > > > In the meantime, please go through the draft shepherd writeup and let me > know if I have erred anywhere. > > > > Thanks, > > > > - vijay > > > - > > Shepherd writeup for draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13 > > 1. Summary. > > The document shepherd is Vijay K. Gurbani, and the responsible area > director is Martin Duke. > > The document is a Standards Track document, targeted as a Proposed > Standard. The WG has chosen the requested publication type since this > draft extends the base ALTO protocol in a normative manner. Specifically, > the document seeks to extend the base ALTO protocol (RFC 7285) to provide > the concept of "Abstract Network Elements" (ANE). ANEs are an abstraction > of physical network components --- routers, etc. --- that handle (switch) > packets. An application whose performance may be impacted by a particular > traversal path in the network may wish to consult the ANEs to determine an > optimized path to the destination. > > This draft is a major conceptual advance in the abstractions provided by > the base ALTO protocol. > > 2. Review and consensus. > This work is mature. It started off as an individual submission in March > 2015, and was adopted as a WG deliverable in May 2017. A detailed review > of this draft was provided early on by Sabine Randriamasy [1,2,3] shortly > after it was adopted. Version -04 was further reviewed by Danny Perez [4] > and Qiao Xiang [5] in 2018, and the work progressed appreciably between > 2018 and 2019, resulting in the release of -09 in November 2019. > > A WGLC was initiated on Sep-28-2020, and a review was provided by Qiao > Xiang [6] and Luis Contreras [7] on version -11. Version -12 included the > comments from Qiao and Luis, with version -13 following with some minor > revisions. > > Earlier versions of path-vector have been implemented (without the > integration of unified-props); the implementation was used in a super > computing conference demonstration for OpenFlow-based networks [8]. The > latest version of path-vector is being implemented and will be open-sourced > on GitHub [9]. > > The shepherd has an action item to review version -13. > > 3. Intellectual property > All of the authors have confirmed with the shephered that they are not > aware of any IPR filed with respect to the draft. > > 4. Other points > IDNits reports 1 error, 7 warnings, and 2 comments. > > [1] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/IQ0WwgWewFKJkvzZSIQRhkiN-hc/ > [2] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/4wa_kXE4GUrigZ33TBCVVuwBuiw/ > [3] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/GGroJgfL5XGuH1ydWOLmISCPMKY/ > [4] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/HSGkZ2o4JvneiiYiVSGcCZjDVSQ/ > [5] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/qnIBXzFEiYxMDm9kvHLH53qbn_Y/ > [6] >
Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft)
Hi Vijay, How do you do? We have fixed most of the IDNits errors/warnings with a new revision -14. The remaining warnings are: 1. IDNits identifes [TBD] as references but we are using them in examples as placeholders for content length values. 2. IDNits thinks the version of [I-D.yang-alto-deliver-functions-over-networks] is -00 but the latest version as we used in the draft is -01. How do you suggest we proceed here? Do you think we can submit -14 right now? Or we should wait for your review on -13? Thanks! Best, Kai -Original Messages- From:kai...@scu.edu.cn Sent Time:2021-01-12 17:46:53 (Tuesday) To: "Qin Wu" Cc: "IETF ALTO" Subject: Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) Hi Qin, Thanks for the notification! I will fix the IDNits errors as soon as possible. Best, Kai 2021-01-12 09:45:08"Qin Wu" wrote: Hi, authors of path-vector: I haven’t seen you addressed IDnits errors raised by Vijay below: https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13.txt Please reply to Vijay and confirm whether there are anything missing or open issues which haven’t been closed. -Qin (With chair hat on) 发件人: alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Vijay Gurbani 发送时间: 2020年12月2日 1:36 收件人: IETF ALTO 主题: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) All: I have started the shepherd review of path-vector The review is below. The token is with me to do a chair/shepherd review of the draft. With the semester coming to a close and grading to do, etc., I have reserved the week starting Dec-16 to do the shepherd review of the draft. In the meantime, please go through the draft shepherd writeup and let me know if I have erred anywhere. Thanks, - vijay - Shepherd writeup for draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13 1. Summary. The document shepherd is Vijay K. Gurbani, and the responsible area director is Martin Duke. The document is a Standards Track document, targeted as a Proposed Standard. The WG has chosen the requested publication type since this draft extends the base ALTO protocol in a normative manner. Specifically, the document seeks to extend the base ALTO protocol (RFC 7285) to provide the concept of "Abstract Network Elements" (ANE). ANEs are an abstraction of physical network components --- routers, etc. --- that handle (switch) packets. An application whose performance may be impacted by a particular traversal path in the network may wish to consult the ANEs to determine an optimized path to the destination. This draft is a major conceptual advance in the abstractions provided by the base ALTO protocol. 2. Review and consensus. This work is mature. It started off as an individual submission in March 2015, and was adopted as a WG deliverable in May 2017. A detailed review of this draft was provided early on by Sabine Randriamasy [1,2,3] shortly after it was adopted. Version -04 was further reviewed by Danny Perez [4] and Qiao Xiang [5] in 2018, and the work progressed appreciably between 2018 and 2019, resulting in the release of -09 in November 2019. A WGLC was initiated on Sep-28-2020, and a review was provided by Qiao Xiang [6] and Luis Contreras [7] on version -11. Version -12 included the comments from Qiao and Luis, with version -13 following with some minor revisions. Earlier versions of path-vector have been implemented (without the integration of unified-props); the implementation was used in a super computing conference demonstration for OpenFlow-based networks [8]. The latest version of path-vector is being implemented and will be open-sourced on GitHub [9]. The shepherd has an action item to review version -13. 3. Intellectual property All of the authors have confirmed with the shephered that they are not aware of any IPR filed with respect to the draft. 4. Other points IDNits reports 1 error, 7 warnings, and 2 comments. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/IQ0WwgWewFKJkvzZSIQRhkiN-hc/ [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/4wa_kXE4GUrigZ33TBCVVuwBuiw/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/GGroJgfL5XGuH1ydWOLmISCPMKY/ [4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/HSGkZ2o4JvneiiYiVSGcCZjDVSQ/ [5] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/qnIBXzFEiYxMDm9kvHLH53qbn_Y/ [6] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/uwFNjekGcc3zMdSKleHU7eIdsW4/ [7] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/D5jkRGws2c75paw6yP8_5_40ViY/ [8] https://github.com/openalto/mercator-setup [9] https://github.com/openalto/sextant___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft)
Hi Qin, Thanks for the notification! I will fix the IDNits errors as soon as possible. Best, Kai 2021-01-12 09:45:08"Qin Wu" wrote: Hi, authors of path-vector: I haven’t seen you addressed IDnits errors raised by Vijay below: https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13.txt Please reply to Vijay and confirm whether there are anything missing or open issues which haven’t been closed. -Qin (With chair hat on) 发件人: alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Vijay Gurbani 发送时间: 2020年12月2日 1:36 收件人: IETF ALTO 主题: [alto] Shepherd writeup for path-vector (draft) All: I have started the shepherd review of path-vector The review is below. The token is with me to do a chair/shepherd review of the draft. With the semester coming to a close and grading to do, etc., I have reserved the week starting Dec-16 to do the shepherd review of the draft. In the meantime, please go through the draft shepherd writeup and let me know if I have erred anywhere. Thanks, - vijay - Shepherd writeup for draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-13 1. Summary. The document shepherd is Vijay K. Gurbani, and the responsible area director is Martin Duke. The document is a Standards Track document, targeted as a Proposed Standard. The WG has chosen the requested publication type since this draft extends the base ALTO protocol in a normative manner. Specifically, the document seeks to extend the base ALTO protocol (RFC 7285) to provide the concept of "Abstract Network Elements" (ANE). ANEs are an abstraction of physical network components --- routers, etc. --- that handle (switch) packets. An application whose performance may be impacted by a particular traversal path in the network may wish to consult the ANEs to determine an optimized path to the destination. This draft is a major conceptual advance in the abstractions provided by the base ALTO protocol. 2. Review and consensus. This work is mature. It started off as an individual submission in March 2015, and was adopted as a WG deliverable in May 2017. A detailed review of this draft was provided early on by Sabine Randriamasy [1,2,3] shortly after it was adopted. Version -04 was further reviewed by Danny Perez [4] and Qiao Xiang [5] in 2018, and the work progressed appreciably between 2018 and 2019, resulting in the release of -09 in November 2019. A WGLC was initiated on Sep-28-2020, and a review was provided by Qiao Xiang [6] and Luis Contreras [7] on version -11. Version -12 included the comments from Qiao and Luis, with version -13 following with some minor revisions. Earlier versions of path-vector have been implemented (without the integration of unified-props); the implementation was used in a super computing conference demonstration for OpenFlow-based networks [8]. The latest version of path-vector is being implemented and will be open-sourced on GitHub [9]. The shepherd has an action item to review version -13. 3. Intellectual property All of the authors have confirmed with the shephered that they are not aware of any IPR filed with respect to the draft. 4. Other points IDNits reports 1 error, 7 warnings, and 2 comments. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/IQ0WwgWewFKJkvzZSIQRhkiN-hc/ [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/4wa_kXE4GUrigZ33TBCVVuwBuiw/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/GGroJgfL5XGuH1ydWOLmISCPMKY/ [4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/HSGkZ2o4JvneiiYiVSGcCZjDVSQ/ [5] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/qnIBXzFEiYxMDm9kvHLH53qbn_Y/ [6] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/uwFNjekGcc3zMdSKleHU7eIdsW4/ [7] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/D5jkRGws2c75paw6yP8_5_40ViY/ [8] https://github.com/openalto/mercator-setup [9] https://github.com/openalto/sextant___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Review for draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-12
Jensen:
My impression, is an optional item in the ANBF, therefore the metric
identifier can be used without as suffix.
I think your proposed change makes sense to me.
-Qin
发件人: Jensen Zhang [mailto:jingxuan.n.zh...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2021年1月12日 15:36
收件人: Qin Wu
抄送: IETF ALTO ; Y. Richard Yang ; Kai Gao
主题: Re: [alto] Review for draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-12
Hi Qin,
I agree with you that the constraints checking should rely on the
implementation. I'm OK that it is not in the scope of this document.
For other comments, I have checked v-13. I think most of them have been
addressed, except for the following one.
Section 2.2., paragraph 16:
>If a metric has no (and hence no - as well), the metric MUST
recommend adding " surrounding -, or using dash character instead;
if possible, giving the precise BNF grammar will be better, as I
see some metrics names also include the dash character ("-").
>be considered as the 50 percentile (median). Since this scheme is
>common for all metrics defined in this document, below we only
>specify the base identifier.
Although I can understand this sentence, I still think it should be better
clarified.
I would suggest giving the BNF grammar at the beginning of this section, e.g.,
... Hence, each performance metric's identifier
should indicate the statistic (i.e., an aggregation operation), to
become
::= [ '-' ]
where MUST be one of the following:
And changing the last paragraph of the section to:
If '-' is not present in , the metric MUST
be considered as the 50 percentile (median).
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 2:22 PM Qin Wu
mailto:bill...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Hi, Jensen:
Speak as individual, My answer to your following question is false as well,
even based on RFC7285, defining hopecount as float point value seem also weird.
I think we can rely on implementation or some automation tools for constraints
checking, but it is not scope of this document.
For other comments, I think Richard have addressed in v-13. Please double check
it. Thanks
-Qin
[alto] Review for draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-12
Jensen Zhang mailto:jingxuan.n.zh...@gmail.com>>
Tue, 13 October 2020 04:17 UTCShow
header
Re: [alto] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15.txt
Hi Qin, Thanks for pointing that out. We have fixed them in version -16. Cheers, Jensen On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 3:04 PM Qin Wu wrote: > Hi, Jensen： > > IDnits tool shows two errors: > > > https://www6.ietf.org/tools/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15.txt > > ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 7159 (Obsoleted by RFC 8259) > > ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC8008], [RFC7336], > > [RFC6707]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight > > textual mentions of the documents in question. > > > > Please fix them. > > > > -Qin > > *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *代表 *Jensen Zhang > *发送时间:* 2021年1月12日 14:36 > *收件人:* IETF ALTO > *主题:* [alto] Fwd: I-D Action: > draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15.txt > > > > Hi all, > > > > We just submitted version -15 of the ALTO CDNI document to address the > following issues: > > > > - Replaced the deprecated term "unified properties" with "entity property > map" to be consistent with draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-15 > > - Moved I-D.ietf-alto-unified-props-new into the normative references > (suggested by Qin [1]) > > > > [1] > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/clLDN-B7nDlIKN3Tq4qxug83tic/ > > > > Best regards, > > Jensen > > > > -- Forwarded message - > From: > Date: Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 2:16 PM > Subject: [alto] I-D Action: > draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15.txt > To: > Cc: > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization WG > of the IETF. > > Title : Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) > Request Routing: CDNI Footprint and Capabilities Advertisement using ALTO > Authors : Jan Seedorf > Y.R. Yang > Kevin J. Ma > Jon Peterson > Jingxuan Jensen Zhang > Filename: draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15.txt > Pages : 41 > Date: 2021-01-11 > > Abstract: >The Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (CDNI) framework >[RFC6707] defines a set of protocols to interconnect CDNs, to achieve >multiple goals such as extending the reach of a given CDN to areas >that are not covered by that particular CDN. One component that is >needed to achieve the goal of CDNI described in [RFC7336] is the CDNI >Request Routing Footprint & Capabilities Advertisement interface >(FCI). [RFC8008] defines precisely the semantics of FCI and provides >guidelines on the FCI protocol, but the exact protocol is explicitly >outside the scope of that document. This document defines an FCI >protocol using the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) >protocol, following the guidelines defined in [RFC8008]. > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15 > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-15 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > ___ > alto mailing list > alto@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-16.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization WG of the IETF. Title : Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Request Routing: CDNI Footprint and Capabilities Advertisement using ALTO Authors : Jan Seedorf Y.R. Yang Kevin J. Ma Jon Peterson Jingxuan Jensen Zhang Filename: draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-16.txt Pages : 41 Date: 2021-01-12 Abstract: The Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (CDNI) framework defines a set of protocols to interconnect CDNs, to achieve multiple goals such as extending the reach of a given CDN to areas that are not covered by that particular CDN. One component that is needed to achieve the goal of CDNI described in CDNI framework is the CDNI Request Routing Footprint & Capabilities Advertisement interface (FCI). RFC 8008 defines precisely the semantics of FCI and provides guidelines on the FCI protocol, but the exact protocol is explicitly outside the scope of that document. This document defines an FCI protocol using the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) protocol, following the guidelines defined in RFC 8008. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-16 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-16 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-16 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
