Hi,
   Some additional comments inline.

Hui Wang
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications,Mobile lIfe and New
mEdia(MINE) Lab

2009/10/11 Tao Ma <[email protected]>

> Hi,
>    Some comments inline.
> Tao Ma
> Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications,Mobile lIfe and New
> mEdia(MINE) Lab
>
>
>>
>>
>> Hi Yu Meng,
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:24:08AM +0800, [email protected] wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > We have submitted a draft on relay usage for ALTO. This document would
>> > describe the background of Qos relay and design the mechanism of
>> combining
>> > ALTO service with relay.
>> >
>> > The draft can be found at
>> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-meng-alto-relay-00.txt.
>> Comments
>> > welcome.
>>
>> Your draft mentions two use cases: the first is the "Connectivity relay"
>> to connect users with limited Internet access (NAT).  I fully agree with
>> that use case and I think that ALTO should be able to assist in
>> selecting an "optimal" (in the sense of ALTO) connectivity relay.
>>
>>
>> However, I am very concerned about the second use case, on which your
>> document focuses: the "QoS relay".  With the goal of lower latencies you
>> are proposing an Application Layer-routing/forwarding mechanism that
>> diverts traffic from the path along which normal IP routing would send
>> the packets:
>>
>> | Under the following two conditions, overlay
>> | routing paths can be faster than the direct IP routing paths
>> | (1) An AS in a direct routing path is congested or failed.
>>
>> Can you please explain which timescales we are talking about?
>>
>> Do you want an ALTO-based solution to reroute around suddenly appearing
>> failures/congestion faster than the IP routing protocols can do?
>>
>> Or is it all about routing around chronically congested links,
>> which are known to the operators to be congested but which they
>> do not want to upgrade for some reason?
>>
> RE: I think relay is a method of overlay routing which has the function of
> bypassing some congested IP path. IP routing can recover from failure too.
> But overlay routing cares more about the application metric. Their
> understanding of failure or congestion might be different. For example, for
> VOIP application which has stringent delay requirements, IP rerouting
> mechanism can’t detect some paths that are actually congested in the view of
> the application requirements. In ALTO-based solution, overlay rerouting
> might be complementary for IP rerouting especially for some QoS
> requirements.
>

To be added, there actually exists interaction between overlay routing and
IP routing. In my opinion, the interaction of them, especially for the
rerouting of failure recovery, needs further research and discussion.


>
>>
>> | (2) Multi-homed customer ASes can further improve overlay routing.
>>
>> If we look at Figure 1 of your draft, can you please explain how the
>> owner of the AS B can publish what kind of transit traffic he is willing
>> to relay through a "QoS relay" in his multi-homed stub AS (if he wanted
>> to relay all kinds of IP traffic, AS B could just become a transit AS on
>> BGP level)?  Should this policy-aware detection of candidate relays be
>> part of ALTO?
>>
> RE: In ALTO-based solution, relay is application relay. As long as there
> are “QoS relay” in AS B, an overlay path which traverses AS B can be
> established, which needs no modification on BGP level. In other words, this
> solution can be seen as policy unaware, for it doesn’t care about IP routing
> policy.
>

To my understanding, ALTO-based solution doesn't depend on IP routing
policy. But it may refer to some BGP information.As is shown in 3.2:"ALTO
server might use BGP routing information to calculate the preference of
relay candidates that P2P application provides. The rating method can be
seen in [draft-racz-bgp-based-alto-service]".


>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sebastian
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Kiesel            mailto:[email protected]
>> Network Research Division   tel:+49-6221-4342-232   fax:+49-6221-4342-155
>> NEC Laboratories Europe     Kurfuerstenanlage 36, 69115 Heidelberg,
>> Germany
>> --
>> NEC Europe Limited          Registered in England 2832014
>> Registered Office           NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to