Hi Martin, ALTO WG,

We have uploaded an updated version to address the wonderful AD reviews. A
good way to see all changes will be the diff:
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-16

At a high level, the main types of changes are to address the high-level
comments are:
- remove "import" so that we do not have the issues of defining the format
of referring to exact RFCs and details of estimation methods. This is
clarified at the beginning of Section 2---it used the new text of AD and
added some more text.
- clarify that the link will be opaque (either human read or machine
readable for automation). An example is Sec. 3.1.4.

We believe that we have addressed all other issues in the review.

Thank you so much!

Richard & authors


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 7:19 PM
Subject: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-16.txt
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization WG
of the IETF.

        Title           : ALTO Performance Cost Metrics
        Authors         : Qin Wu
                          Y. Richard Yang
                          Young Lee
                          Dhruv Dhody
                          Sabine Randriamasy
                          Luis Miguel Contreras
        Filename        : draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-16.txt
        Pages           : 33
        Date            : 2021-07-11

Abstract:
   Cost metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic
   Optimization (ALTO), and different applications may use different
   cost metrics.  Since the ALTO base protocol (RFC 7285) defines only a
   single cost metric (i.e., the generic "routingcost" metric), if an
   application wants to issue a cost map or an endpoint cost request to
   determine the resource provider that offers better delay performance,
   the base protocol does not define the cost metric to be used.

   This document addresses the issue by introducing network performance
   metrics, including network delay, jitter, packet loss rate, hop
   count, and bandwidth.

   There are multiple sources (e.g., estimation based on measurements or
   service-level agreement) to derive a performance metric.  This
   document introduces an additional "cost-context" field to the ALTO
   "cost-type" field to convey the source of a performance metric.



The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics/

There is also an htmlized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-16

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-16


Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/


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

Reply via email to