Vijay,
Yes, I realized that "here be dragons." :-)
So how about recasting this discussion as format for *new* ALTO services,
like FCS & topology, but leave the existing cost & network maps as they
are?
Of course, if this new approach becomes popular, we might just happen to
notice that it would simplify the existing cost and net maps as well.
- Wendy Roome
On 07/27/2016, 10:58, "Vijay K. Gurbani"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[As an individual, of course]
>
>On 07/27/2016 09:10 AM, Wendy Roome wrote:
>> Vijay,
>>
>> It would not obsolete rfc7285, but it would deprecate much of it. An
>> ALTO server would continue to provide network maps, cost maps, ECS,
>> EPS, etc, as in 7285.
>
>Deprecating rfc7285 is not a viable option at this point, at least in my
>opinion. I think this will add a level of uncertainty to pending work
>that may be detrimental and slow down the progress that we witnessed at
>the Berlin IETF.
>
>I am not being obtuse, of course, just pragmatic.
>
>> But new work & extensions would use the new presentation scheme.
>>
>> The new format resources can co-exist in the IRD with the rfc7285
>> resources. Ideally, an ALTO server would provide cost map resources
>> in both old & new formats, via different resource entries in the
>> IRD.
>
>Ultimately whether to go this route is something that the WG will have
>to decide collectively, but my personal opinion is that "here there be
>dragons" :-)
>
>Cheers,
>
>- vijay
>--
>Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
>1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
>Email: [email protected] / [email protected]
>Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
