As a co-author of draft-medved-alto-svr-apis-00, let me explain my motivations 
for interest in this subject.

My primary motivation is to have *some* scalable means to populate (my) ALTO 
servers with current network information. Note that I don't think there needs 
to be only ONE way to populate ALTO servers. Certainly it needs to be possible 
to use manual configuration as well. Maybe there is room for proprietary 
mechanisms as well -- perhaps ALTO server vendor-driven (eg unique routing 
ingest mechanisms and algorithms), perhaps ALTO server purchaser-driven (eg via 
open/proprietary APIs to the ALTO server).

My secondary motivation is to ensure that, with respect to automated population 
of network information into ALTO servers, I could choose ALTO server vendors 
and router vendors fairly independently. That's why the use of a common 
protocol (BGP) is of interest, because it is commonly implemented by router 
vendors and commonly deployed by service providers. We had talked a long time 
ago in ALTO about using "looking glass servers" as a potential network 
information source, and usually looking glass servers are based on BGP routes.

That's why I am interested in an open specification for an ALTO server to 
network API.

-- Rich

P.S. I don't think ALTO servers need to listen to BGP *and* the IGP.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Benjamin Niven-Jenkins
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 6:16 PM
To: Jan Medved
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [alto] Do we need to standardise an ALTO Server to Network API?

Jan,

On 14 Apr 2011, at 00:54, Jan Medved wrote:
> On 4/13/11 4:32 AM, "Ben Niven-Jenkins" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> * Extracting network topology is not an interoperability issue between
>> ALTO servers. Each ALTO server can extract the network topology
>> independently and if the topology needs to be distributed between ALTO
>> servers then it is an ALTO Server-Server API that needs standardising
>> *not* an ALTO Server-Network API.
> 
> Actually, extracting network topology and generating the abstracted
> network topology (maps) is an interoperability issue between ALTO Servers,
> and it can not be completely separated from the exchange of topology
> between ALTO servers. For ALTO Servers to be able to exchange (and
> reconcile) their respective abstracted topologies (maps) with each other,
> the topologies need to be equivalent. This then drives the need for a
> common set of data from which the topology is created and a normalized way
> to generate the topology from the data (which we mentioned in the draft,
> but did not attempt to specify).

I think this is the crucial bit for me. If you want two ALTO servers to produce 
the same result you need to identify the key bits of information they need to 
obtain from the network and how they will translate that into a ALTO 
representation of the network.

How they extract that information from the network is an orthogonal problem. 
Throwing the entire IGP into BGP (or for that matter specifying that an ALTO 
server must listen to both BGP and the IGP) doesn't help you with 
interoperability as you haven't specified what information the ALTO server 
needs know and what it needs to do with that data to generate the network and 
cost maps, you've just specified one possible way to import the raw data into 
the ALTO server.

<snip>

> Standardizing the way to get network topology through ALTO will extend
> ALTO's applicability rather than limit it. If ALTO does not define a
> standardized way to generate maps from topology data, people will simply
> use BGP (eventually with extensions that will convey the TE / IGP topology
> information), and bypass an ALTO Service that a provider may offer.

But your draft (and any ALTO Server - Network API) doesn't address how to 
standardise the way to get topology through ALTO. It just proposes one possible 
way to get topology *into* an ALTO server.

Ben


_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to