bill, all, a couple of comments here below
- on the scope: one may to limit to pull systems but the acquisition techniques should also imho consider hybrid push-pull system - on the structure/content: . section 2: i agree that a section should be included that provides for an overview of the pull-system(s) and this before detailing operational experience. but section 2 and 3 shall be reverted as metrics are common (a section 3.1 on the metrics i detailed should be considered) . section 2: segmentation of successful/unsuccessful is a matter of choice but i would not qualify them as successful/unsuccessful at that stage but keep analytical evaluation in section 4 . section 4: deals with characteristics and observations from the field but there is a need to tackle the actual performance of these systems. it is also worthwhile detailing performance wrt to the different replacement algorithms (LRU,LFU,LRR) thanks, -dimitri. ps: i missed your e-mail you sent on Dec.3rd > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of William Herrin > Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 4:26 AM > To: Peter Schoenmaker > Cc: [email protected]; Routing Research Group Mailing List > Subject: Re: [rrg] [GROW] Operational experience with cache > based mapping ID > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 6:46 PM, Peter Schoenmaker > <[email protected]> wrote: > > It seems there is interest in this topic. But to move > forward we need > > volunteer(s) to act as the editor. > > > > Do we have more specifics about the protocols to be > studied, and what the > > paper would contain? > > Hi Peter, > > Apologies for my delinquency on this. > > First, based on the feedback I've heard, I suggest keeping the > discussion about operational experience with pull-cache mapping > systems on GROW. GROW's traffic is pretty light right now. RRG has > gotten active as of late and I suspect there are a number of folks on > GROW who are interested in this subject but don't want to wade through > all the RRG messages. > > Folks on RRG who want to subscribe to GROW to follow and participate > in this discussion can do so at: > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow . I will cut the RRG list > from future messages on this topic. > > > > For the document, I was thinking along the lines of: > > 1. Introduction: We're looking to learn the difference between > successful and unsuccessful pull-cache mapping systems so that as we > consider using pull-cache for Internet routing we can avoid proposals > with the characteristics of an unsuccessful pull-cache map. > > 2. Interesting pull-cache systems seen in operations (brief summaries) > > 2a. At least two successful pull-cache systems. DNS and CPU > ram cache perhaps? > > 2b. At least four superseded (unsuccessful) pull-cache systems. Cisco > fast switching (cache single IP address destinations in a hash table). > What else? > > 3. Metrics for each system > > 3a. Estimated upper bound of entries in the system (DNS has billions > of entries. A CPU cache can handle millions of ram pages). > > 3b. Estimated upper bound of active entries in typical cache. (a few > hundred thousand names at once in a DNS cache. Around hundred thousand > pages in a CPU ram cache). > > 3c. Typical entries served per second (a few thousand with DNS. A > couple billion with the CPU cache) > > 3d. Typical delays on a cache miss (a couple hundred ns with the CPU > cache. 50 to 2000 ms with the DNS) > > 3e. Replacement algorithm > > 3f. Etc. > > 4. Commonalities > > 4a. Characteristics common to both successful and unsuccessful > pull-cache systems > > 4b. Characteristics observed primarily in unsuccessful > pull-cache systems > > 4c. Characteristics observed primarily in successful > pull-cache systems > > 5. Conclusions: what to look for and what to avoid in proposed > pull-cache systems for routing. > > > Thoughts? Any suggestions for what interesting but failed pull-cache > information systems we can glean insight from? > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > > p.s. Dimitri, did you receive my 12/2 response to your 11/29 email? > Wondering if we have a rogue spam filter somewhere between us. > > -- > William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] > 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> > Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg > _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
