Keep in mind that ALTO doesn't control the applications' peer assignment - it is a data source that provides guidance into the application. Ultimately the application uses that information, along with everything else that it knows, in order to determine its own optimal peer selection algorithm based on the specifics of the application.
I would suggest that the application using ALTO should indicate what attributes that it cares about (e.g. latency, throughput, cost). The ALTO server can take this into account when providing guidance, if the ISP (or whoever is running the ALTO server) cares to do so. - Laird Popkin, CTO, Pando Networks mobile: 646/465-0570 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Burger" <[email protected]> To: "Song Haibin" <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 8:52:45 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York Subject: Re: [alto] differences among applications I would offer it is important to have the client specify what it thinks is important. However, I would also offer it would be fatal to have "Profile B", "Profile N", "Profile S" selection algorithms, where B, N, and S are different applications. I will guarantee that by the time we're done in the IETF, no one will case about those applications and will have moved on to some other, hot applications. It may be worth noting what parameters are important. On Feb 10, 2009, at 7:25 AM, stefano previdi wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Song Haibin wrote: > >> I think it is necessary to discuss whether we need to standardize >> different >> peer selection algorithms according to different types of >> applications. > > We may want the alto protocol to allow the requester to specify > which type of ranking/preference it needs. Note that this doesn't > mean we need to standardize any algorithm. > > s. > >> >> Best Regards, >> Haibin >> Email: [email protected] >> Skype: alexsonghw >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>> Behalf Of >> Enrico >>> Marocco >>> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:16 PM >>> To: Zoran Despotovic >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [alto] differences among applications >>> >>> Zoran Despotovic wrote: >>>> I was wondering if and how IETF would address possible >>>> differences among >>>> relevant P2P applications in the sense that different >>>> applications may >>>> require totally different solutions. Was there any discussion on >>>> this >>>> before on the list? >>> >>> Yes, there's been some discussion about how to deal with the fact >>> that >>> different applications may have different requirements for peer >>> selection -- e.g. file-sharing would benefit most from connections >>> to >>> peers with higher uplink bandwidth, while realtime communications >>> applications would probably want to chose media relays with the >>> smallest >>> delay. >>> >>> I remember someone suggested that a way to address it could be to >>> simply >>> provide a means for the querying peer to specify what parameters it >>> would like to have optimized (delay, bandwidth...) and let the ALTO >>> server use such information in its processing. However, AFAIK, no >>> solution proposals at this time do anything like that. >>> >>> -- >>> Ciao, >>> Enrico >> >> _______________________________________________ >> alto mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
