Hi ALTO working group,

After some internal discussions, we are reaching some agreements on the
path vector draft. Below are some key design points and your comments and
feedback are highly welcomed.

1. A new cost type for path vector

We feel more comfortable with the cost type used in -v05, where the mode is
"array" and the metric is "ane".

It conveys the idea that the results are JSON arrays and the values should
be interpreted as identifiers of abstract network elements.

2. A mechanism to query properties of abstract network elements

Since we move the property of an abstract network element out of the cost
type, a new mechanism is required so that 1) a server can announce what
properties can be contained in the response, and 2) a client can specify
its desired properties.

Unfortunately, this is one point where we don't have consensus. One simple
solution is to add a new capability (e.g., "ane-properties") to the IRD
entry, and a client should also specify the intended properties in the
"ane-properties" field.

A second option is to reuse the designs of unified property map. Precisely,
a path vector service should announce at least one entity domain "ane" and
associated properties, as defined in the unified property map draft.

3. Encoding two messages

Each path vector response consists of an (endpoint) cost map and a unified
property map. Eventually, we decide to use the multipart/related media type
and specify whether it contains a cost map or an endpoint cost map in the
"type" parameter in the IRD.

This serves two purposes: 1) it guarantees the returned path vector and the
properties are consistent, and 2) it only takes one communication cycle and
the server doesn't have to keep the state.

We are going to present more details about the current design in the draft
discussion meeting next week (June 26) and hopefully finalize the design
before IETF 105 submission deadline (July 8). You are more than welcome to
join the discussion!

Many thanks!

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

Reply via email to