Hi all, Just a thought, some networks already provide public performance metrics, and ALTO should be able to provide such info in a standard way and cover these metrics, if we agree:
-AT&T - http://ipnetwork.bgtmo.ip.att.net/pws/averages.html - http://ipnetwork.bgtmo.ip.att.net/pws/network_delay.html shows latency, loss, jitter, reliability, modem success rate - In particular, the link provides a methodology page ( http://ipnetwork.bgtmo.ip.att.net/pws/glossary.html), which points to a major challenge in defining the metrics: metrics have parameters (e.g., the AT&T link specifies 15-min interval for latency), and I assume that ALTO cannot work with a single interval, but then how do we handle parameters? - CenturyLink (formerly Qwest): - https://kai04.centurylink.com/PtapRpts/Public/BackboneReport.aspx shows jitter, latency, pkt delivery rate, availability ... And we could think that ALTO could be extended to be used as a standard way to check on the service outage of an endpoint ( http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-support/cable-tv/outages-in-your-area/), which may imply performance metrics as well... Thanks. Richard On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Qin Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf > Of *Y. Richard Yang > *Sent:* Monday, October 14, 2013 7:20 AM > *To:* IETF ALTO > *Cc:* [email protected]; Qin Wu > *Subject:* [alto] ALTO Extension: Defining a Cost Metrics document?**** > > ** ** > > Dear all,**** > > ** ** > > I am reading up on the documents that define cost metrics. **** > > ** ** > > The motivation is that the base ALTO protocol ( > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-alto-protocol-20.txt) has defined only > one Cost Metric: 'routingcost':**** > > ** ** > > - Defined the semantics at Sec. 6.1.1.1 of , and then listed it at Table 3. > **** > > ** ** > > - Used "hopcount" in examples of Sec. 9.2.3 and 9.2.4, but the semantics > of not formally defined.**** > > ** ** > > Given the aforementioned state of the base protocol, I see good value in > that the WG produces a WG document that defines a relatively complete set > of Cost Metrics.**** > > ** ** > > I particular, I read the following:**** > > ** ** > > - http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-alto-app-net-info-exchange-02**** > > (Sec. 3.4 introduced three metrics: hopcount, latency, pktcost, and cost) > **** > > ** ** > > - http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wu-alto-json-te-01**** > > Defined a set of metrics: in Sec. 4. This work, as stated in the > document, is motivated by **** > > ** ** > > - http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-04.txt**** > > ** ** > > During the review of ALTO base protocol, we are suggested to document > performance metrics (cost metrics) per the guideline of **** > > - RFC 6390 Guidelines for Considering New Performance Metric Development. > A. Clark, B. Claise. October 2011. (Format: TXT=49930 bytes) (Also BCP0170) > (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)**** > > ** ** > > Here a first question, I have, is whether the authors will produce a > "simple" document, at the upcoming IETF, whose only purpose is to:**** > > ** ** > > define a set of cost metrics, including the nameing, the semantics, ... > following the guideline per RFC 6390, that can benefit the base protocol.* > *** > > ** ** > > [Qin] This is exactly what I we are doing in draft-wu-alto-json-te. We > are checking if we can give a complete list of cost metrics that are built > based on**** > > draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution-03,RFC5305, draft-wu-idr-te-pm-bgp > <http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-wu-idr-te-pm-bgp-02.txt>,draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-04, > draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-01.**** > > We will further generalize them to firstly have some base metrics that can > applied either to the whole path or any link in the path and then have**** > > Derived metrics that are link specific.**** > > ** ** > > The update (v-02) will come in a few days. **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > I feel that such a document is focused, and has good value by itself.**** > > ** ** > > The implications of the introducing multiple cost metrics can be explored > in another document, which I will send in another email shortly.**** > > ** ** > > Thanks.**** > > ** ** > > Richard**** > > **** >
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
