Dear Sanjay, Thank you so much for the careful review! We will follow the suggestions and take a pass. In particular, we will enumerate a few examples of error handling as suggested. We will post a new version by Tuesday.
Richard On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:12 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > I have review draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-09 and don’t have > any issues except some minor suggestions and nits. > > > > *Sec 1 Introduction:* > > 1. If by using “functionalities” below is meant to reference the > two RFC (RFC 7975 & RFC 8008), semantically, it may be better to state that > the request routing interface is covered in two separate RFCs and reference > the two RFC by name and number. > > a. Correspondingly, the request routing interface is broadly > divided into two functionalities: (1) CDNI Footprint & Capabilities > Advertisement interface (FCI), and (2) CDNI Request Routing Redirection > interface (RI). > > > > 2. (replace is -> are) > > a. A protocol to transport and update such objects between a uCDN > and a dCDN, however, is not defined > > 3. (delete “some”) > > b. In this way, a uCDN can effectively fetch capabilities of some > footprints in which it is interested > > 4. (add “as defined” instead of “defined” in two places in the > sentence starting as below) > > c. Throughout this document, we use the terminologies for CDNI > defined… > > > > *Section 2.1:* > > 5. (replace “For a detailed discussions” with “For detailed > information…” ) > > d. For a detailed discussion, the reader is referred to the RFCs. > > 6. Remove extra sub bullet at the end of section 2.1 since there is > no text (check the document for other instances of bullet but no text). > > > > *Section 2.2:* > > 7. Remove reference to I-D.jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases > > 8. Replace (“Identifications -> Identification): Security: > Identifications between uCDNs and dCDNs are extremely important > > 9. Can an example be added of what unexpected cases authors > envision? > > a. Error-handling: The ALTO protocol has undergone extensive > revisions in order to provide sophisticated error-handling, in particular > regarding unexpected cases > > *Section 6:* > > 10. Re-word (“First, we describe how to represent”) > > a. We firstly describe how to represent > > 11. Replace (“And then” with “Second”) > > > > *Section 8:* > > 12. Add a colon after follows > > a. included as follows. > > 13. Needs some rewording for the sentence below: > > a. For availability of ALTO services, an attacker may get the > potential huge full CDNI > > > > Thanks > > Sanjay > > > > *From:* CDNi [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Vijay Gurbani > *Sent:* Monday, February 3, 2020 10:08 AM > *To:* IETF ALTO <[email protected]>; [email protected] > *Subject:* [E] [CDNi] WGLC for > draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-09 > > > > All: Jan and I will like to start WGLC for > draft-ietf-cdni-request-routing-alto-09. The WGLC period will run from > Mon, > Feb 3 2020 to Wed, Feb 19 2020. > > This email is also being cross-posted to the CDNI working group. > > We will like to have one WG list member from ALTO and one WG list member > from > > CDNI review this draft in depth. Please send Jan and me an email if you > are willing > > review the draft as part of WGLC. > > > > In addition, we will like general reviews of the draft from both ALTO and > CDNI WGs. > > > > Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > -- Richard
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
