Hi Med, Qin,

Thanks for triggering this discussion.

I will comment on Proposal #1, but not sure if part of my comments could be 
considered as related to Proposal #2.

I think that supporting ALTO operations is certainly needed. As long as we are 
having operational experience is evident that some additional work is needed. 
And also, some additional work is identified as convenient because of the new 
types of services that are being demanded if compared with the past. Let me 
please explain my arguments.

My first comment is on security. All aspects related to security required of 
additional work due to the criticality of the information being exposed. For 
instance, how to avoid the inference of sensible network information from the 
analysis of the values of the PID identifiers; or ways of isolating ALTO 
servers from potential attackers acting as clients e.g. by means of pub/sub 
schemes, to mention a couple of examples. Security is an important missing 
piece on ALTO specs, worthy to be developed. These situations are emerging now 
as consequence of deployment experience in real networks, so addressing real 
situations. There are some other areas of work related to deployments, but not 
to security, which are important as well, such as ALTO redundancy/protection, 
frequency of topology updates (i.e. freshness), etc, that can be relevant to 
consider, as well.

Second comment is on other ways of consuming ALTO information. For example, 
existing ALTO specs relay on PIDs for building network and cost maps. However, 
in operators' networks is extremely common to work with BGP communities as 
grouping of prefixes with a common purpose. Thus, it seems convenient to bring 
the idea of BGP communities into ALTO [1]. Note that the scope of a BGP 
community can differ from the scope of a PID (e.g., the BGP community 
representing a set of prefixes sharing a common characteristic other than the 
topological one). Note as well that the concept of BGP community is tightly 
related to the definition and application of policies. So, I guess you can 
perceive the potential of combining the information provided by ALTO (network + 
cost map+ further information such as performance metrics [2]) together with 
the network policies by means of BGP communities.

Third comment is on multi-domain. This is very sensible for operators. The vast 
majority of services today imply multi-domain setting. Just as an example, 
around 70 - 80% of traffic today in operators' network is coming from OTT 
services (video streaming, gaming, social networks, hybrid clouds, etc). This 
is intrinsically multidomain because content providers are different 
administrative domains, and in some cases there is the need of traversing 
intermediate domains for accessing contents. The role of multi-domain ALTO can 
be key for achieving a more efficient service delivery, end-to-end. And because 
this multi-domain nature, having standardize solutions is key for lowering 
integration time, costs and efforts. Defining common syntax and semantics of 
the interchanged information across domains is fundamental [3].

Fourth is on additional operational situations where ALTO can assist on 
simplifying the operation and improving the overall target of automation in 
service provider networks. Just as a couple of examples. Let's consider for 
instance the complexities generated in terms of keeping up-to-date network and 
cost maps for pools of prefixes being dynamically allocated in different parts 
of the network. In some cases, this is favored by the control-user plane 
separation (CUPS) approach, in some other cases because of the allocation of 
pools for CGNAT, or for APNs in the mobile network, etc. All of this dynamicity 
is difficult to track and keep updated, so ALTO can become an essential piece 
for an up-to-date view and operation of this complexity. Another example is 
represented by the proposition from the Fujitsu colleagues in ALTO in respect 
the consideration of geolocation information within the ALTO network and cost 
maps [4]. This is relevant not only for the trust-related scenarios as 
originally identified by Fujitsu, but also because it can be an enabler for 
other important operational cases such as the ones related to GPDR enforcement 
[5], which imposes obligations to operators.

Finally, having in mind the value of ALTO for operations, I think it is 
unavoidable to consider new capabilities originated by operational situations 
not present in our networks some years ago. Let me briefly refer to the 
exposure of additional information with topological relevance, for instance the 
one related to compute. As we all know, there is a new WG named CATS addressing 
part of the problem space related to the consideration of compute information. 
It is relevant to remark the "TS" part (i.e., traffic steering) since it 
implies that there are already in place some functions/applications where to 
steer the traffic, with the decision being internal to the network by 
operator's nodes. For the big problem space of compute-related information 
there are yet important parts not covered by CATS where ALTO has an essential 
role. Let me just mention a few: one is the exposure of compute-related 
information towards applications, where the applications are the ones taking 
decisions based on such information (not the network nodes); a second one, the 
addressing of scenarios where topological information of the available 
infrastructure is relevant for taking decisions, such as service function 
placement (i.e., there are not yet functions deployed -so no possibility of 
steering anything- but the information is yet needed for placement decisions); 
etc (there are others, such as the multidomain view, etc, but don't want to 
create an extremely long mail).

In summary, and from the perspective of an operator like Telefonica: ALTO is 
becoming an extremely important piece for automation of network operations in 
with respect to the exposure of information toward services/applications (both 
internal and external). There are real operational situations identified that 
can benefit from the maintenance and extensions of ALTO requiring different 
degrees of work. And there is now an industrial momentum realizing the need of 
further exploring further integration/interaction between applications and 
networks [6]. ALTO is the best positioned IETF development for playing the role 
of IETF "Network Exposure Function" that can provide necessary information from 
the network (in IETF sense) to applications (either external or internal) or to 
different overlay networks (CDN, 3GPP, SD-WAN, etc) relaying on top of the IETF 
network. Up to now we as a group have had some propositions in "dormant" state 
waiting for the chance of a new charter that could allow to develop them. Some 
other propositions are derived from the deployment work that helps to identify 
missing pieces. This discussion arrives in the proper moment for taking all 
those propositions into consideration and scope the work in those directions.

Thanks again for triggering the discussion, and apologies for the long mail

Best regards

Luis

P.S. After reading Jordi's mail, I think his "Proposal #3: Support ALTO 
extension for the new industry needs" is a very valid option to consider, 
giving room to fix identified limitations but also allowing to incorporate new 
capabilities justified by needs coming for new forms of services and 
applications.

[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-contreras-alto-bgp-communities-00
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics/
[3] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lachos-alto-multi-domain-use-cases-02
[4] 
https://www.fujitsu.com/global/documents/about/research/article/202212-trust-enhanced-networking/trust_enhanced_networking_whitepaper_en.pdf
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
[6] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-iab-path-signals-collaboration-03.txt

De: alto <[email protected]> En nombre de [email protected]
Enviado el: miércoles, 22 de marzo de 2023 9:09
Para: IETF ALTO <[email protected]>
CC: Qin Wu <[email protected]>
Asunto: [alto] Discussion on the future of ALTO WG

Hi all,

As the WG is about to finalize the last chartered items, we would like to have 
a discussion on the future of the WG with all of you. We will also have a slot 
during the IETF#116 meeting on this matter. The plan is to let this discussion 
open for the coming two months (i.e., ** till end of May **).

Please note that we are also planning to organize a set of interims (mostly in 
replacement of the weekly meetings). Announcements should follow soon.

Together with Qin, we discussed the following two options:

# Proposal # 1: Support ATLO Operations
## Rationale

  *   Many I-Ds are being proposed to ALTO.
  *   Some deployments/products are being disclosed.
  *   Having a referent WG is a signal that the IETF is ready to support 
operations and fix flaws/limitations that will be reported.
  *   ALTO integration complications were out of the scope. Documenting those 
with a set of deployment choices may be a helper for other deployments.
  *   There is constant engagement and dedication of a core team to deliver 
ALTO specs.
## Proposed direction of work

  *   Recharter the WG with a focus on ALTO maintenance and integration with 
data sources. Dedicated YANG modules will be produced.

# Proposal # 2: Revitalize ALTO
## Rationale

  *   Some of the proposed ALTO work is research-oriented (PANRG, would be more 
appropriate for some items), while other may be conducted in new WGs (e.g., 
CATS).
  *   Some of the key foundations of ATLO might not be valid after 15 years.
  *   Closing the WG is not a failure, but a sign of ALTO specification 
maturity.
  *   Revitalizing the ALTO effort is thus needed.
## Proposed direction of work

  *   Consider closing ALTO right after the completion of OAM/Transport items.
  *   Move ALTO maintenance to TSVWG.
  *   Use the ALTO/TSVWG mailing lists to socialize deployment experience.
  *   Based on the maintenance that might be shown in TSVWG and shared 
deployments, reassess the interest of the community in enriching ALTO with 
additional features by organizing a formal BoF.

We are seeking for the WG feedback/preference for each of these two options. 
Specifically, feel free to challenge the rationales above, propose concrete 
action items for #1, disclose ALTO products developments you are aware of, etc.

Absent sufficient engagement, the ** default that the Chairs will formally 
discuss with our AD is Proposal #2 **.

FWIW, we expect this discussion to be an input for Martin, as we do have the 
following in the current charter:

  Furthermore, the Area Director and chairs will assess the state of the
  deliverables at the end of 2022. If the Area Director judges that delivery of
  these documents is not imminent, and that documentation of wide deployment is
  missing, the AD may close the working group immediately.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Qin & Med

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.

________________________________

Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede 
contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la 
persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda 
notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin 
autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha 
recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente 
por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.

The information contained in this transmission is confidential and privileged 
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. 
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not 
read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this 
communication in error and then delete it.

Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode 
conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa 
ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica 
notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização 
pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem 
por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e 
proceda a sua destruição
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to