Hi Wendy,

Your cases do point out that it can be a better, more general solution that
filtering/some end point properties can include the resource id(s) in the
input parameter to indicate the base/scope.

Regarding the encoding pid.network-map-resource-id, its syntax is not
conventional, because the operator "." typically is not used in this way,
and hence could be confusing.

Richard
On Jul 26, 2013 3:04 PM, "Wendy Roome" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Richard,
>
> That would work, although adding a "network map resource ID" parameter to
> the EPS resource begs the question of why  doesn’t a filtered cost map
> resource have a similar parameter, as opposed to being bound to a specific
> network map.
>
> How about the following alternative: encode the network map name into the
> property name. Eg,
>
>      "pid"   means the endpoint's PID in the default network map (iff one
> is defined)
>      "pid.network-map-resource-id" means return the endpoint's PID in that
> network map (iff it exists)
>
> A complication is that EPS must return the vtag when it returns a pid
> property, and it can only return one vtag for all pid properties. One
> solution is to restrict each EPS request to PIDs from a single network map.
> That's not elegant, but it's simple, and I don't think it would be a
> hardship for any client.
>
> - Wendy Roome
>
> From: "Y. Richard Yang" <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, July 26, 2013 14:20
> To: Wendy Roome <[email protected]>
> Cc: IETF ALTO <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [alto] Endpoint property service, network maps and the PID
> property
>
> Hi Wendy,
>
> On Jul 26, 2013 8:35 AM, "Wendy Roome" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Two questions. First, must an endpoint property service depend on a
> > network map?  That is, can a server define one that doesn't "use" a
> > network map?  After all, except for the PID, endpoint properties are tied
> > to the endpoint address, not the network map.
>
> Agree with your assessment. It depends on the property. Some examples not
> tied to a network map are Metered or not, subscribed bw, or rack number in
> a previous DC example.
> >
> > Second, "{10.3.1} Endpoint Property" says:
> >
> > "If an ALTO Server provides one or more Endpoint Property resources, then
> > at least one MUST provide the ¹pid¹ property."
> >
> >
> > What if there are several network maps? If a server provides that service
> > for one map, must it provide that for every map?
> >
> > One possible restatement is,
> >
> > "If an ALTO Server provides one or more Endpoint Property resources that
> > depend on a specific network map, then at least one of those resources
> > MUST provide the ¹pid¹ property for that network map."
> >
> > Another possibility is just drop that requirement altogether, and let the
> > server decide if it wants to offer the "pid" property.
>
> Good observation. The requirement of adding pid came from a previous
> review. Suppose we keep the requirement. I see your observed problem of
> multiple network maps, and if the request specifies only pid, which network
> map. Given that we will likely (1) require at least one network map, (2)
> specify one as default, then the response to a pid property query returns
> the result based on the default map. We should allow the pid query to
> include the resource id of a specific network map to handle the general
> case. Does this address the problem?
>
> Thanks!
> Richard
> >
> >         - Wendy Roome
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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