Dear all,
I just uploaded the shepherd write-up for draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost to
the datatracker (fyi below).
Authors: you still need to fix one downward ref (see below). Let me know
when you intend to do this. Once this is done, I will set the status to
"submit to IESG".
- Jan
*1. Summary*
Jan Seedorf is the document shepherd for draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost.
Mirja Kühlewind is the responsible Area Director.
The document itself has a long history, having started as a -00 document
in the ALTO WG as an individual draft in October 2010 (author: Sabine
Randriamasy).It transitioned to a WG document in May 2015 (after the
ALTO WG had been re-chartered to work on extensions to the original ALTO
protocol as specified in RFC 7285) (authors: Sabine Randriamasy, Wendy
Roome, Nico Schwan).
The ALTO protocol as specified in RFC 7285 allows to only query results
for one single ALTO cost metric in a given ALTO request.
draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost defines a “new service that allows a client
to retrieve several cost metrics with one request, which is considerably
moreefficient” [draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost-04]. This is clearly a very
useful extension of the ALTO protocol and covered in the current ALTO
charter.
The working group is targeting this document as Standards Track, which
is appropriate as the document extends the ALTO protocol, specifying new
formats for allowed client requests (in JSON).
*2. Review and Consensus*
The document has been presented at multiple IETF meetings and discussed
on the mailing list. It is well-known in the ALTO WG and there is clear
consensus to standardise the proposed ALTO extension. A WGLC was issued
on July 4, 2016.During this WGLC a detailed review has been produced by
Xin Wang, extensive additional comments were provided by Richard Yang
and Hans Seidel. The comments raised have been addressed in the -03
version of draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost. Last outstanding comments have
been finally addressed in the latest -04 (September 2016) and -05
versions (February 2017).
In summary, there is clear support and consensus for
draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost in the ALTO WG, and it provides a very useful
extension to the base ALTO protocol. A WGLC has successfully been
passed, and extensive reviews were provided by various members of the WG
and have all been addressed.
*3. Intellectual Property*
The shepherd confirms that each author has stated to him that to the
best of his/her (i.e. the author’s) knowledge, all IPR related to this
document has been disclosed.
There have been two IPR disclosures on this document (see
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2615/ and
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1628/). Both these IPR disclosures have
been posted on the ALTO mailing list. There was no discussion on these
IPR statements.
*4. Other Points*
RFC2119 is listed as a normative reference but not listed in the DOWNREF
Registry
(http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DownrefRegistry)
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DownrefRegistry%29>.
The authors have been notified and will fix this issue.
This document does not introduce any IANA considerations and does not
introduce any privacy or security issues that are not already present in
the ALTO protocol
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
