Makes perfect sense to me.
Is it fair to say an ALTO server adds intelligence to the network? Or is it more accurate to say that ALTO enables more intelligent app execution via the availability of network [and perhaps other] information? ________________________________ From: Stanislav Shalunov [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 3:54 PM To: DePriest, Greg (NBC Universal) Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [alto] differences among applications That's, to me, the idea of ALTO. The apps using information about ISP routing preferences and the network to improve peer selection. Note that this is a very broadly applicable technique: sure, BitTorrent and other P2P apps are most obvious users to begin with, but any sort of app that has a choice of network destinations can benefit. Think along the lines of CDNs, HTTP mirrors, or DNS servers choice, for example. On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:11 PM, DePriest, Greg (NBC Universal) <[email protected]> wrote: Just to be sure: You envision the app selecting peers for specific pieces of content and peer selection will use network data of some type in doing so? ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stanislav Shalunov Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:51 PM To: Zoran Despotovic Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [alto] differences among applications As others pointed out, an ALTO protocol is not expected to make peer selections for the apps. On a high level, it's expected to provide information about the network and about ISP routing preferences. While peer selection preferences vary from application to application substantially, the network itself is the same, and so the information about it remains valid. -- Stas On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Zoran Despotovic <[email protected]> wrote: Hi all, 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? Just as an example, different criteria to drive peer selection may work differently for give-to-get streaming and tit-for-tat BT. So how will IETF deal with this? Standardize different solutions for different applications? Standardize one solution for all? Pick the most critical (heaviest traffic) applications and standardize a solution for it? It makes sense to clarify that at this early stage and, perhaps, first see if the solution should and can be application agnostic or not. Best regards, Zoran -- Zoran Despotovic, Ph.D. Senior Researcher DOCOMO Communications Laboratories Europe GmbH Landsbergerstrasse 312, 80687 Munich, Germany Tel: +49-89-56824-205 Fax: +49-89-56824-300 http://www.docomoeurolabs.de/ Managing Directors (Geschaeftsfuehrer): Dr. Toru Otsu, Dr. Narumi Umeda, Mr. Tsutomu Sakai Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 132976 -------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto -- Stanislav Shalunov BitTorrent Inc [email protected] personal: http://shlang.com -- Stanislav Shalunov BitTorrent Inc [email protected] personal: http://shlang.com
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
