[alto] Agenda reshuffle
Folks: I have re-shuffled the agenda a bit to accommodate better flow. The duration of time allocated to each item has not changed, but the order of the item may have changed. If you are planning on ducking in and out of the ALTO WG, you may want to scan the reshuffled agenda. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Need slides for the following items ...
Folks, I do not have slides for the following items. If you have sent them to me previously, please resend them. - ALTO CDNI, Shawn Lin - ALTO path vector, Dawn Chen - ALTO unified properties, Sabine Randriamasy - ALTO survey, Dawn Chen or Shawn Lin Since it is Sunday late night Montreal time, you may want to send them to me as soon as you can. Our session starts at 9:30am local time Mon. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Slides for the Montreal meeting
All: Please send me and Jan the slides for the Montreal meeting; please convert your slides to PDF before sending them. Some of you have started to send us the slides. I will upload them on Sunday. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11
All: The WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse is now over. Authors, please attend to the review comments by releasing a new version that incorporates these. We will move the document ahead when the new version becomes available. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt
Jensen and Dawn have reviewed S6 and S7 of draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-07. Their review has not uncovered substantive drawbacks of the text in these sections; the changes requested by the authors are more editorial in nature. Authors, please make a note of these editorial comments. Therefore, based on this, I will go ahead and put -07 up for IESG review with the expectation that these comments on S6 and S7 will be fixed with whatever feedback we get from IESG for the draft. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Draft agenda uploaded
All: The draft agenda has been uploaded for Montreal; please see https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/agenda-102-alto-00 We believe we have satisfied all requests that we received; please make sure that if you sent Jan and me a request that it is reflected in the agenda. Of course, the agenda is fluid, so expect it to change a bit as we approach the meeting. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Agenda requests
Folks: The agenda requests were due by yesterday (Wed, Jul 4). I do not see any requests in my inbox. If you have sent the agenda request, please resend. If not, please send it today so Jan and I can get the draft agenda uploaded. Please send: 1. Your name. 2. Time for requested slot. 3. Internet-Draft name and URL As usual, precedence will be given to WG chartered drafts. Our aim is to wrap up any remaining discussions on the chartered drafts and move these ahead as expeditiously as possible. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt
Dawn: Excellent. Thanks a lot. Jensen has also volunteered to look at S6 and S7. As soon as you post your reviews of these sections by Wed, we'll move the work ahead, subject to what you find in your review, of course. Cheers, On 07/03/2018 10:33 AM, Dawn Chan wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > I can do a review of S6 and S7 too. > > Dawn > > > > From: Jensen Zhang > Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 10:55:18 AM > To: Vijay K. Gurbani > Cc: 92yichenq...@tongji.edu.cn; Chan Dawn; Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - > FR/Paris-Saclay); alto@ietf.org; geng...@yale.edu > Subject: Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt > > Hi Vijay, > > I will give a review on S6 and S7 by Wednesday. > > Best, > Jensen > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 6:26 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: > Sabine: Thank you for getting this out. I was hoping that all nits > identified by IDNits tool will be taken care in this revision. > Unfortunately, IDNits reports three warnings for -06. These need to be > eventually fixed, perhaps as part of Auth-48, etc. > > But before I can send the draft to IESG, I need key members of the WG > who have reviewed previous versions of this draft to review the newly > added Security Considerations section. You only need to review this > section, as previous versions of the draft were reviewed in their > entirety. The new addition here is S6 (Security Considerations) and S7 > (Operations Considerations). > > Can I please request a subset of the following people to review S6 and S7: > >Yichen Qian, Li Geng, Dawn Chen, and Jensen Zhang > > I will like at least two people from the above set to read S6 and S7 and > let the WG know whether the draft is ready to be moved out of the WG. > > Please do so soon, preferably by Wed midnight (US Eastern). The > sections are short, but your reading and feedback to the WG will be > invaluable. > > Thank you, > > On 07/02/2018 10:23 AM, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) wrote: >> Hello, >> >> In this version 06: >> >> - Section 6 Security Considerations has been revised for a more complete >> threat model, >> - A new Section 7 "Operations Considerations" has been added and now >> contains the initial text on Security Considerations of version >> draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-05. >> >> Thanks, >> Sabine >> >> -Original Message- >> From: alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org>] On >> Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org> >> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 5:09 PM >> To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org<mailto:i-d-annou...@ietf.org> >> Cc: alto@ietf.org<mailto:alto@ietf.org> >> Subject: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt >> >> >> 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 Cost Calendar >> Authors : Sabine Randriamasy >> Richard Yang >> Qin Wu >> Lingli Deng >> Nico Schwan >> Filename: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt >> Pages : 27 >> Date: 2018-07-02 >> >> Abstract: >>The goal of Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) is to >>bridge the gap between network and applications by provisioning >>network related information in order to allow applications to make >>network informed decisions. The present draft extends the ALTO cost >>information so as to broaden the decision possibilities of >>applications to not only decide 'where' to connect to, but also >>'when'. This is useful to applications that need to schedule their >>data transfers and connections and have a degree of freedom to do so. >>ALTO guidance to schedule application traffic can also efficiently >>help for load balancing and resources efficiency. Besides, the ALTO >>Cost Calendar allows to schedule the ALTO requests themselves and >>thus to save a number of ALTO transactions. >> >>This draft proposes new capabilities and attributes on filtered cost >>maps and endpoint cost maps enabling an ALTO Server to provide "Cost >>Calendars". These capabilities are applicable to ALTO metrics with >>time-varying valu
Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt
Jensen: Awesome. Thanks! On 07/02/2018 09:55 PM, Jensen Zhang wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > I will give a review on S6 and S7 by Wednesday. > > Best, > Jensen > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 6:26 AM Vijay K. Gurbani <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: > > Sabine: Thank you for getting this out. I was hoping that all nits > identified by IDNits tool will be taken care in this revision. > Unfortunately, IDNits reports three warnings for -06. These need to be > eventually fixed, perhaps as part of Auth-48, etc. > > But before I can send the draft to IESG, I need key members of the WG > who have reviewed previous versions of this draft to review the newly > added Security Considerations section. You only need to review this > section, as previous versions of the draft were reviewed in their > entirety. The new addition here is S6 (Security Considerations) and S7 > (Operations Considerations). > > Can I please request a subset of the following people to review S6 > and S7: > > Yichen Qian, Li Geng, Dawn Chen, and Jensen Zhang > > I will like at least two people from the above set to read S6 and S7 and > let the WG know whether the draft is ready to be moved out of the WG. > > Please do so soon, preferably by Wed midnight (US Eastern). The > sections are short, but your reading and feedback to the WG will be > invaluable. > > Thank you, > > On 07/02/2018 10:23 AM, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - > FR/Paris-Saclay) wrote: > > Hello, > > > > In this version 06: > > > > - Section 6 Security Considerations has been revised for a more > complete threat model, > > - A new Section 7 "Operations Considerations" has been added and > now contains the initial text on Security Considerations of version > draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-05. > > > > Thanks, > > Sabine > > > > -Original Message- > > From: alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org > <mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of > internet-dra...@ietf.org <mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org> > > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 5:09 PM > > To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org <mailto:i-d-annou...@ietf.org> > > Cc: alto@ietf.org <mailto:alto@ietf.org> > > Subject: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt > > > > > > 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 Cost Calendar > > Authors : Sabine Randriamasy > > Richard Yang > > Qin Wu > > Lingli Deng > > Nico Schwan > > Filename : draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt > > Pages : 27 > > Date : 2018-07-02 > > > > Abstract: > > The goal of Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) is to > > bridge the gap between network and applications by provisioning > > network related information in order to allow applications to make > > network informed decisions. The present draft extends the ALTO > cost > > information so as to broaden the decision possibilities of > > applications to not only decide 'where' to connect to, but also > > 'when'. This is useful to applications that need to schedule their > > data transfers and connections and have a degree of freedom to > do so. > > ALTO guidance to schedule application traffic can also efficiently > > help for load balancing and resources efficiency. Besides, the > ALTO > > Cost Calendar allows to schedule the ALTO requests themselves and > > thus to save a number of ALTO transactions. > > > > This draft proposes new capabilities and attributes on filtered > cost > > maps and endpoint cost maps enabling an ALTO Server to provide > "Cost > > Calendars". These capabilities are applicable to ALTO metrics with > > time-varying values. With ALTO Cost Calendars, an ALTO Server > > exposes ALTO cost values in JSON arrays where each value > corresponds > > to a given time interval. The time intervals as well as other > > Calendar attri
Re: [alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11
Kerim: Great, thanks a lot for volunteering. Please post your review on the WG email list. I suspect that you are getting acquainted with IETF processes; in that vein, here's some quick advice that I hope will help you as you perform a WGLC. A WGLC covers the entire I-D, you can point out anything in the draft that you feel needs to be improved. Generally speaking, every reviewer has their own style of performing WGLC reviews, you can see some examples here [1, 2]. However, all reviews should include issues that are 'major' (needs attention of author AND WG to moving the work ahead), minor (may only need the attention of author to clarify things), and 'nits' (needs attention of authors only). It is okay if one or more of these categories is empty, however, due diligence must be done to ensure that there were indeed no issues to raise under that particular category. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03581.html [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03513.html Cheers, On 07/02/2018 05:30 PM, Kerim Gokarslan wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > I talked with Richard and I would like to help with a review. > > Regards, > Kerim Gokarslan > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Y. Richard Yang <mailto:y...@cs.yale.edu>> wrote: > > Dear WG, > > The authors have gone ahead to fix the coupling issue between update > stream and stream control. To allow the community to read what the > document reads like, we have uploaded the newer version, which can > be found at: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/> > Please see version 12. > > It is a much cleaner, modular, complete design. Last-call feedbacks, > of course, are still highly appreciated and the authors will update > as soon as possible, to improve on reactiveness. > > Thanks a lot! > Richard > > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 11:09 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: > > Richard, one of them must provide a WGLC review for the draft. > The WG > must to due diligence through dedicated reviews to ensure that > the work > reflects the consensus of the WG. > > I will like to see new members to start contributing to the WG, > as such > while my preference would be for Danny to review the draft and > post WGLC > comments, I will leave it to the WG members to decide who will > review it. > > I was hesitant to ask Sabine and Jensen since, in all fairness, they > have done their share of reviews and comments over the years. I > iterate, it would be great if other members of the WG step up to > move > the work ahead. > > >From a process point of view, I realize that the cutoff is > today so I am > expecting that we will not be in time to submit a version. However, > that is fine as long as we have a WGLC on the currently > submitted draft > by the time we have our meeting on Monday, Jul-16. > > After the meeting, I can do the proto-writeup and move the work > ahead. > > Cheers, > > On 07/02/2018 09:46 AM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > > Vijay, > > > > The ideas that I posted were discussed with Sabine, Jensen, > and Danny, > > who are not co-authors of the document. > > > > I assume that they are busy today, as 8 pm ET today is IETF draft > > deadline. Maybe they can help with our review tomorrow (July > 3) or the > > day after tomorrow (July 4), before the close :-) > > > > Thanks! > > Richard > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 9:34 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com> > > <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com > <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>>> wrote: > > > > Folks: Following up on Richard's email, we need a > dedicated WGLC review > > for SSE from the WG. Jan and I will like to invite at > least one person > > who is not an author to volunteer to review the draft as > part of WGLC. > > > > Thus far, besides Richard's email, there has not been any > review or > > comments on the draft since it was released for WGLC. We > will need to > > be more
[alto] Agenda requests for Montreal IETF (deadline: Wed, Jul 4, 2018)
All: If you are interested in presenting updates to your drafts at the Montreal IETF, please send Jan and me the following information by Wednesday: 1. Your name. 2. Time for requested slot. 3. Internet-Draft name and URL As usual, precedence will be given to WG chartered drafts. Our aim is to wrap up any remaining discussions on the chartered drafts and move these ahead as expeditiously as possible. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt
Sabine: Thank you for getting this out. I was hoping that all nits identified by IDNits tool will be taken care in this revision. Unfortunately, IDNits reports three warnings for -06. These need to be eventually fixed, perhaps as part of Auth-48, etc. But before I can send the draft to IESG, I need key members of the WG who have reviewed previous versions of this draft to review the newly added Security Considerations section. You only need to review this section, as previous versions of the draft were reviewed in their entirety. The new addition here is S6 (Security Considerations) and S7 (Operations Considerations). Can I please request a subset of the following people to review S6 and S7: Yichen Qian, Li Geng, Dawn Chen, and Jensen Zhang I will like at least two people from the above set to read S6 and S7 and let the WG know whether the draft is ready to be moved out of the WG. Please do so soon, preferably by Wed midnight (US Eastern). The sections are short, but your reading and feedback to the WG will be invaluable. Thank you, On 07/02/2018 10:23 AM, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) wrote: > Hello, > > In this version 06: > > - Section 6 Security Considerations has been revised for a more complete > threat model, > - A new Section 7 "Operations Considerations" has been added and now contains > the initial text on Security Considerations of version > draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-05. > > Thanks, > Sabine > > -Original Message- > From: alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > internet-dra...@ietf.org > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2018 5:09 PM > To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org > Cc: alto@ietf.org > Subject: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt > > > 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 Cost Calendar > Authors : Sabine Randriamasy > Richard Yang > Qin Wu > Lingli Deng > Nico Schwan > Filename: draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06.txt > Pages : 27 > Date: 2018-07-02 > > Abstract: >The goal of Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) is to >bridge the gap between network and applications by provisioning >network related information in order to allow applications to make >network informed decisions. The present draft extends the ALTO cost >information so as to broaden the decision possibilities of >applications to not only decide 'where' to connect to, but also >'when'. This is useful to applications that need to schedule their >data transfers and connections and have a degree of freedom to do so. >ALTO guidance to schedule application traffic can also efficiently >help for load balancing and resources efficiency. Besides, the ALTO >Cost Calendar allows to schedule the ALTO requests themselves and >thus to save a number of ALTO transactions. > >This draft proposes new capabilities and attributes on filtered cost >maps and endpoint cost maps enabling an ALTO Server to provide "Cost >Calendars". These capabilities are applicable to ALTO metrics with >time-varying values. With ALTO Cost Calendars, an ALTO Server >exposes ALTO cost values in JSON arrays where each value corresponds >to a given time interval. The time intervals as well as other >Calendar attributes are specified in the IRD and ALTO Server >responses. > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-06 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > ___________ > alto mailing list > alto@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > ___ > alto mailing list > alto@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11
Richard, one of them must provide a WGLC review for the draft. The WG must to due diligence through dedicated reviews to ensure that the work reflects the consensus of the WG. I will like to see new members to start contributing to the WG, as such while my preference would be for Danny to review the draft and post WGLC comments, I will leave it to the WG members to decide who will review it. I was hesitant to ask Sabine and Jensen since, in all fairness, they have done their share of reviews and comments over the years. I iterate, it would be great if other members of the WG step up to move the work ahead. >From a process point of view, I realize that the cutoff is today so I am expecting that we will not be in time to submit a version. However, that is fine as long as we have a WGLC on the currently submitted draft by the time we have our meeting on Monday, Jul-16. After the meeting, I can do the proto-writeup and move the work ahead. Cheers, On 07/02/2018 09:46 AM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > Vijay, > > The ideas that I posted were discussed with Sabine, Jensen, and Danny, > who are not co-authors of the document. > > I assume that they are busy today, as 8 pm ET today is IETF draft > deadline. Maybe they can help with our review tomorrow (July 3) or the > day after tomorrow (July 4), before the close :-) > > Thanks! > Richard > > > > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 9:34 AM Vijay K. Gurbani <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: > > Folks: Following up on Richard's email, we need a dedicated WGLC review > for SSE from the WG. Jan and I will like to invite at least one person > who is not an author to volunteer to review the draft as part of WGLC. > > Thus far, besides Richard's email, there has not been any review or > comments on the draft since it was released for WGLC. We will need to > be more proactive as a WG to move pending work ahead. > > Please send me and Jan a message on whether you are able to perform a > review of the draft in short order so we can move it ahead > expeditiously. > > Thank you, > > On 07/01/2018 10:32 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > > Dear WG, > > > > Thanks a lot for those who already sent comments to the authors! As an > > important service, this document can benefit from in-depth reviews, as > > Vijay pointed out. > > > > The main substantive comment so far is on clarifying the coupling > > between the Update Stream Service (USS), which will be used by the > > network to send SSE Update Messages to a client, and the Update Stream > > Control Service (USCS), which will be used by the client to > control the > > server, by sending add/remove of resources messages. In the current > > design, SSE update messages can provide the final outcome of a control > > request. The comment was whether this is a generic design. > > > > After extensive discussions among the authors, we propose to make the > > following revisions---these revisions will be simple and clean, and if > > approved by the WG, they can be updated right away: > > > > M1. The document clarifies that USS uses a *modular* design, in > that the > > Update Stream Service (USS) is a modular service. Hence, it can be > > controlled by not only USCS but also other potential control channels, > > such as a private control protocol. Hence, the messaging of USS, in > > particular, its Control Update Messages, should be (slightly) > revised to > > reflect this spirit. > > > > M2. The document clarifies that USS uses a self-contained design, to > > take advantage that current design can be simply, elegantly > extended to > > also report error updates. > > > > The authors request that the WG approve these edits so that the > authors > > can proceed to submit a revision shortly, in just a couple days. > > > > Of course, the authors will also wait for other comments, until > the July > > 4th closing, to make a single, coherent edit. > > > > Thank you so much! > > Richard > > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:21 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > > mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com> > <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>>> > wrote: > > > > All: This email announces the WGLC for SSE [1]; the WGLC runs > from Wed, > > Jun 20, 2018 to Wed, Jul 4, 2018. > > > > We will like the community members to perform an in-depth >
Re: [alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11
Folks: Following up on Richard's email, we need a dedicated WGLC review for SSE from the WG. Jan and I will like to invite at least one person who is not an author to volunteer to review the draft as part of WGLC. Thus far, besides Richard's email, there has not been any review or comments on the draft since it was released for WGLC. We will need to be more proactive as a WG to move pending work ahead. Please send me and Jan a message on whether you are able to perform a review of the draft in short order so we can move it ahead expeditiously. Thank you, On 07/01/2018 10:32 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > Dear WG, > > Thanks a lot for those who already sent comments to the authors! As an > important service, this document can benefit from in-depth reviews, as > Vijay pointed out. > > The main substantive comment so far is on clarifying the coupling > between the Update Stream Service (USS), which will be used by the > network to send SSE Update Messages to a client, and the Update Stream > Control Service (USCS), which will be used by the client to control the > server, by sending add/remove of resources messages. In the current > design, SSE update messages can provide the final outcome of a control > request. The comment was whether this is a generic design. > > After extensive discussions among the authors, we propose to make the > following revisions---these revisions will be simple and clean, and if > approved by the WG, they can be updated right away: > > M1. The document clarifies that USS uses a *modular* design, in that the > Update Stream Service (USS) is a modular service. Hence, it can be > controlled by not only USCS but also other potential control channels, > such as a private control protocol. Hence, the messaging of USS, in > particular, its Control Update Messages, should be (slightly) revised to > reflect this spirit. > > M2. The document clarifies that USS uses a self-contained design, to > take advantage that current design can be simply, elegantly extended to > also report error updates. > > The authors request that the WG approve these edits so that the authors > can proceed to submit a revision shortly, in just a couple days. > > Of course, the authors will also wait for other comments, until the July > 4th closing, to make a single, coherent edit. > > Thank you so much! > Richard > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:21 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: > > All: This email announces the WGLC for SSE [1]; the WGLC runs from Wed, > Jun 20, 2018 to Wed, Jul 4, 2018. > > We will like the community members to perform an in-depth review of the > draft and post their comments, concerns or approval to the mailing list > during this period, even if it is one liner expressing support for > moving the draft ahead. > > [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11 > > Thank you, > > - vijay > -- > Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com > <mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com> > Network Data Science, Nokia Networks > Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > ___ > alto mailing list > alto@ietf.org <mailto:alto@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Proto writeup for cost-calendar
All: Here is the proto-writeup for cost-calendar. There are a couple of problems with the draft that will require a new version. Primary among them is the lack of a security consideration section. I have asked the authors to add one, and as soon as the new version becomes available, I will request that the reviewers named in the proto writeup please review the security consideration section. Here is the proto writeup. ALTO Cost Calendar draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-04 Shepherd: Vijay K. Gurbani 1. Summary The document shepherd is Vijay K. Gurbani. The responsible Area Director is Mirja Kuehlwind. This document is an extension to the base ALTO protocol (RFC 7785). It extends the ALTO cost information service such that applications decide not only 'where' to connect, but also 'when'. This is useful for applications that need to perform bulk data transfer and would like to schedule these transfers during an off-peak hour, for example. This document is targeted as a Standards Track document (Proposed Standard). This designation is appropriate as the document contains normative behaviour and message formats that should be adhered to by the communicating entities in order to realize the extension. 2. Review and Consensus Cost calendar is a well-know extension within the working group, having been first presented as an individual document on Jul 4, 2014 (individual -00 version). It was subsequently adopted as WG item on Jul 28, 2016. The work has been reviewed by at least four key WG members in the past. Version -01 was reviewed on Jun 29, 2017 by Yichen Qian and Li Geng; version -02 was reviewed by Dawn Chen on Jul 12, 2017 and by Jensen Zhang on Dec 02, 2017. A WGLC was held on Feb 22, 2018. There is one known implementation, authored by the editor of the draft. The work has been discussed extensively in the WG over the years, and the WG feels that the document is ready to be moved out of the group and into IESG. 3. Intellectual Property 3/5 of the author team has confirmed conformance with BCP 78/79 with the shepherd. The shepherd is waiting for the remaining 2/5. There are no IPR disclosures on the document. 4. Other Points Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11
All: This email announces the WGLC for SSE [1]; the WGLC runs from Wed, Jun 20, 2018 to Wed, Jul 4, 2018. We will like the community members to perform an in-depth review of the draft and post their comments, concerns or approval to the mailing list during this period, even if it is one liner expressing support for moving the draft ahead. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-11 Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Need to move SSE to WGLC, but ...
Dawn: Does the version of SSE submitted to the IETF archives reflect the consensus achieved in [1]? If not, I would kindly urge you to spin a new version of SSE with this consensus in it. I will like that version to go to WGLC so that list members get another opportunity to comment on it. Please do so as soon as you can, preferably within a 24-hour period if possible. I will start a WGLC for the new version as soon as it becomes available. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03684.html Thanks, On 06/16/2018 01:36 AM, Dawn Chan wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > A new version of SSE is already submitted to the WG. We can move things > forward. > > Thanks, > Dawn >> On 15 Jun 2018, at 9:24 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote: >> >> Richard, Dawn: As per [1], we need to move SSE ahead. >> >> Since the posting of [1], there has been some discussion on the >> remaining open issue with SSE; this discussion is captured in [2]. >> >> So, I think it is time to move the work ahead with the consensus reached >> in [2]. >> >> Please issue a new version of the SSE draft by Monday. As soon as it >> appears in the IETF archives, Jan and I will start a WGLC on it. >> Further discussions --- if any --- on the consensus reached in [2], can >> be held as part of WGLC. >> >> [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03686.html >> [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03684.html >> >> Thanks, >> >> On 06/11/2018 05:50 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: >>> Hi Vijay, all >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:03 AM Vijay K. Gurbani >>> mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: >>> >>>Dawn: Yes, pipelining is another good reason to send the response in >>>the update stream control service. >>> >>>This, and the other reasons I indicate in a different thread [1] >>>makes me prefer option 2. >>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Richard >>> >>> >>>[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03687.html >> >> - vijay >> -- >> Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com >> Network Data Science, Nokia Networks >> Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Need to move SSE to WGLC, but ...
Richard, Dawn: As per [1], we need to move SSE ahead. Since the posting of [1], there has been some discussion on the remaining open issue with SSE; this discussion is captured in [2]. So, I think it is time to move the work ahead with the consensus reached in [2]. Please issue a new version of the SSE draft by Monday. As soon as it appears in the IETF archives, Jan and I will start a WGLC on it. Further discussions --- if any --- on the consensus reached in [2], can be held as part of WGLC. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03686.html [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03684.html Thanks, On 06/11/2018 05:50 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > Hi Vijay, all > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 11:03 AM Vijay K. Gurbani > mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote: > > Dawn: Yes, pipelining is another good reason to send the response in > the update stream control service. > > This, and the other reasons I indicate in a different thread [1] > makes me prefer option 2. > > > +1 > > Richard > > > [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03687.html - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO
Shawn: This is very informative; thanks for putting this together! Cheers, On 06/11/2018 12:20 AM, Shawn Lin wrote: > Dear ALTOers, > > > @Dawn, @Danny and I are working on a survey of ALTO. Our goal is to > understand what ALTO can already do in the real system, how others use > ALTO and the additional requirements for newer applications (like SDN, > NFV, Block-chain network) to do the traffic optimization. [...] - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Need to move SSE to WGLC, but ...
Dawn: Yes, pipelining is another good reason to send the response in
the update stream control service.
This, and the other reasons I indicate in a different thread [1]
makes me prefer option 2.
[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03687.html
Cheers,
On 06/11/2018 03:47 AM, Dawn Chan wrote:
> Hi Vijay,
>
> Thanks for the reply, it is a good point that the result should also be sent
> in the update stream service.
>
> Besides, there is another point that the result should also be sent in the
> update stream service. If the server process requests asynchronously, when it
> receives the request from the client and insert it in its queue, it will
> first send a response back to the client; and after the server successfully
> processed the request, it will send a reply via the update stream service.
> This case requires the server to indicate the state of the “remove” operation
> in the reply. A simple attribute “state” with type JSON boolean in the
> UpdateStream ControlEvent can solve the concern. If "state" is false, the
> operation fails; if "state" is true, the operation succeeds.
>
> object {
> [String control-uri;]
> [Boolean state;]
> [String remove<1..*>;]
> } UpdateStreamControlEvent;
>
> This is my idea for option 2.
>
> Wish to hear opinions from others in the group.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Dawn
>
>
> From: alto on behalf of Y. Richard Yang
>
> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 3:57:14 AM
> To: Gurbani, Vijay (Nokia - US)
> Cc: IETF ALTO
> Subject: Re: [alto] Need to move SSE to WGLC, but ...
>
> Dear Vijay, Jan,
>
> Thank you so much. It is a wonderful idea to check the WG for additional
> comments on the mentioned issues. The authors will address suggestions, if
> any, and then move the document forward.
>
> Thanks!
> Richard
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 11:04 AM Vijay K. Gurbani
> mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>> wrote:
> Folks: Jan and I would like to move SSE [1] to WGLC.
>
> Looking at the mailing list, we note that the authors are asking input
> from the WG on an issue in SSE [2].
>
> We would kindly request the WG to spend some time thinking about the
> question being asked in [2] and to chime in with some thoughts.
>
> Assuming that there is no response by next week on this, the authors can
> proceed with their default position on this, for which they have an
> articulated reason in [2].
>
> Jan and I will follow up next week and if there has not been any further
> list discussion on this, we will move the work ahead to WGLC.
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/
> [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03684.html
>
> Thanks,
>
> - vijay
> --
> Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com<mailto:vijay.gurb...@nokia.com>
> Network Data Science, Nokia Networks
> Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
>
> ___
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org<mailto:alto@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>
>
> --
> --
> =
> | Y. Richard Yang mailto:y...@cs.yale.edu>> |
> | Professor of Computer Science |
> | http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/|
> =
>
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Network Data Science, Nokia Networks
Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Remaining issue of SSE
[... As individual ...] Dawn: I prefer option 2 for the following reasons: a) The "remove" request is sent through the update stream control service, therefore it seems appropriate (and expected) to send a response through the update stream control service as well. b) I would rather not conflate the responses at the HTTP layer with the responses that are pertinent to the entities processing the HTTP bodies. Responses at the HTTP layer are needed to satisfy the HTTP state machinery. Yes, they can act as hints to the entity processing the HTTP body, but my philosophy in protocol design is to be as explicit as possible. Such explicitness calls out for each layer to be responsible for its transactions instead of inferring the state of a transaction by some exogenous means. Doing so may be a bit redundant, but decreases the ambiguity that is the bane of protocol design, IMHO. Cheers, On 05/23/2018 03:28 AM, Dawn Chan wrote: > Hi authors of SSE and ALTOers in the working group, > > According to the last ALTO WG meeting, we have a remaining issue > about SSE. SSE now provides two services, the update stream service > and the update stream control service. Update stream control service > allows a client to remove resources or add additional resources. The > issue is that when the client sends a “remove” request through the > update stream control service, how will the server inform the client > that the operation is successful or not. From the last discussion, we > proposed two response options: When the client sends “remove” request > to the server, response options are: > 1. The server notifies outcome to the client in the HTTP response by > using an HTTP response code. > 2. The server notifies outcome to the client in an HTTP response by > using an HTTP response code and also an update stream message. Curren > draft adopts option 2. > > The question is: Is it really necessary for the server to send a > response in the update stream? > > The motivation for the server to send a response in the update stream > is that there might be the inconsistency between the process dealing > with the update stream service and the process dealing with the > update stream control service. So only sending an HTTP response code > does not really stand for the real actions taken by the update stream > service. However, personally thinking, such situations only indicate > the misbehavior of the server rather than the misbehavior of the > protocol. The server can design its own mechanisms to stay avoid such > mistake. Thus, adopting option 1 is enough. Do you support option 1? > It would be great to hear your ideas. - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Need to move SSE to WGLC, but ...
Folks: Jan and I would like to move SSE [1] to WGLC. Looking at the mailing list, we note that the authors are asking input from the WG on an issue in SSE [2]. We would kindly request the WG to spend some time thinking about the question being asked in [2] and to chime in with some thoughts. Assuming that there is no response by next week on this, the authors can proceed with their default position on this, for which they have an articulated reason in [2]. Jan and I will follow up next week and if there has not been any further list discussion on this, we will move the work ahead to WGLC. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/ [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03684.html Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-xdom-disc-02
All: Pursuant to the discussion at the London IETF (minutes soon to be made available), it was decided to move ALTO XDOM [1] for WGLC. Sebastian submitted a new version on Mar-05-2018 [2]; the main changes are that the Introduction (S1) has been shortened and the procedure specification section (S2) has been revised for clarity. The chairs and the authors believe that the document is ready for WGLC. As such, we will like to open up a WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-xdom-disc-02 starting from Tue, Apr 17 2018 to Tue, May 01 2018. We will like the community members to perform an in-depth review of the draft and post their comments, concerns or approval to the mailing list during this period. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-xdom-disc/ [2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03639.html Thank you, Vijay K. Gurbani and Jan Seedorf ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] SSE final touches
I think that is a wise decision. One can continue adding bits and pieces to the protocol ad infinitum. Best to get what we have out and let the implementations and needs then guide us towards whether multipart update will serve a substantive community. If it does, I suspect that willing hands will rise to scratch that particular itch. >From my understanding, nothing is preventing the update of multiple objects, just that with the current constructs, they have to be done serially instead of in parallel. Cheers, On 03/18/2018 12:16 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > Jan, > > The authors had a very extensive discussion again. We have decided to > support only single-object ALTO resources, and leave multipart, which > can be a nice feature to support composition without the need of > accumulating all objects into a single object, as future work. We edited > a few sentences to make clear. > > Thanks a lot for the guidance! - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-03 period over
Folks: The WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-03 was started on Feb 22 and ended on Mar 4. While there was no list discussion on the group during the WGLC, we (the chairs) the chairs suspect that this is due to the maturity of the draft, and the fact that it has been closely reviewed in the past by key WG members. As such, we will move the work ahead. If anyone has any questions or comments that they want to raise on the draft, this will be a good time. After the London IETF we will proceed with the logistics associated with moving the work out of the WG and onto the AD's plate. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Updated ALTO agenda
Folks: There has been a slight change in the agenda as we added a chartered item (SSE) to the discussion. Please take a look at the updated agenda at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/agenda-101-alto.txt It is a packed agenda, as usual; please do pay attention to the minutes allocated to determine the right number of slides for presentation. Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Slides for presentation
All: Please send Jan and me a *** PDF version *** of your slides preferably by Sunday night. The ALTO meeting is on Monday, so please send us the slides as they become ready. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Updated agenda
All: The agenda has been updated to account for the Unicorn draft. Please see the updated agenda at [1]. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/agenda-101-alto.txt Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Draft agenda for London IETF posted
Folks: Thank you for your patience as we got the agenda ready. A draft agenda has been posted at [1] for the London IETF. Jan and I believe we satisfied all of the agenda requests that were submitted. Please eyeball the agenda and let us know of any irregularities. See you in London! [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/agenda-101-alto Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Agenda requests for London IETF
ACK On 03/06/2018 02:30 AM, Kai Gao wrote: > Hi Vijay and Jan, > > > I would like to request a slot on the path vector compression draft. > > Time: 10min > > Presenter: Kai (Jensen and Dawn may serve as backups) > > Draft: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gao-alto-routing-state-abstraction/ > > Thanks very much! > > > Regards, > > Kai > > > On 03/06/2018 01:09 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote: >> Folks: Pursuant to the call for agenda requests on Feb-17 [1], we have >> only received a couple of agenda requests. >> >> If you have sent them out, please make sure that you Cc both Jan and me, >> and please make sure you get an acknowledgement. >> >> If you have not sent them out, you should do so today as draft agendas >> are due on Wednesday (tomorrow). >> >> [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03606.html >> >> Cheers, >> >> - vijay >> -- >> Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com >> Network Data Science, Nokia Networks >> Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq >> >> ___ >> alto mailing list >> alto@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Agenda requests for London IETF
Folks: Pursuant to the call for agenda requests on Feb-17 [1], we have only received a couple of agenda requests. If you have sent them out, please make sure that you Cc both Jan and me, and please make sure you get an acknowledgement. If you have not sent them out, you should do so today as draft agendas are due on Wednesday (tomorrow). [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03606.html Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] unified-props, cellular addresses and path-vector
[As co-chair] Sabine, Richard: If you decide to proceed as you outline below, then please realize that time is of essence. [As individual contributor] I am a bit confused by this discussion though. Are cellular addresses ALTO address types? In which case they will have to be registered in the ALTO Address Type Registry as detailed in Section 14.4 of the base ALTO RFC [1]. Or are cellular address ALTO entities? In which case they will have to be registered through unified-props registry in Section 9.2 of the unified-props document [2]? Why do we have legacy identifiers like 'ipv4' and 'ipv6' being registered in two registries, i.e., in the registries of [1] and [2]? In fact, why do we have a ALTO Entity Domain Registry in [2] at all? I am afraid I am missing something ... can you please elaborate? [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7285#section-14.4 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-01#section-9.2 Thanks, On 02/26/2018 10:18 AM, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) wrote: > Hi Richard, > > I agree, the Unified Property draft is definitely a good placeholder for > the cellular addresses. Domain and entities are already defined in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-randriamasy-alto-cellular-adresses-01 > . So how about in a next step, we consider pouring the content of the > latter draft in the UP draft and in a further step propose a list of > properties, while looking at other WG to see whether they already > specified any? - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] unified-props, cellular addresses and path-vector
All: In preparation for moving the unified property draft [0] ahead, the minutes of the December 2017 Virtual Interim Meeting [1] indicate that the chairs seek answers to the following questions from the WG: (1) Are cellular addresses an important abstraction that the working group will like to introduce in ALTO? Currently, cellular address format is specified in a companion draft [2]. (2) If yes, is the unified-props-new draft the correct place to add the cellular representation? Please note that the unified property draft [0] gates path-vector [3], as there is a dependency of path-vector on unified-props. Thus, the plan is to move these two drafts ahead as a bundle. Which means that we need to reach a conclusion on the questions posed above so unified-props and path-vector can move ahead. Please express an substantive opinion on the above questions in the mailing list. [0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new/ [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2017-alto-01/materials/minutes-interim-2017-alto-01-201712180600/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-randriamasy-alto-cellular-adresses/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector/ Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-03
All: This email starts the process of WGLC for the cost calendar work [1]. As the minutes of the December 2017 ALTO Virtual Interim meeting [2] reflect, the chairs were to ratify the decision to go to WGLC on the list and move the work ahead. Consequently, please consider this email as a aggregated ratification and WGLC notice. If a WG community member does not agree to such ratification of the work to go to WGLC, please let the WG know during the WGLC period established below. The WGLC period runs from Thu, Feb 22 2018 to Sun, March 4, 2018. The work has been reviewed by key WG members (Jensen and Dawn) in the past. The chairs believe that the work is mature and ready to be moved ahead. The chairs would like to solicit further comments from the WG community on this work as part of the WGLC process. Please read the draft [1] and provide any comments to the author in preparation for a revision of the draft post-WGLC that will close any open editorial issues as well. Thank you, [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2017-alto-01/materials/minutes-interim-2017-alto-01-201712180600/ Vijay K. Gurbani and Jan Seedorf ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] incr-updates-sse action needed
Wendy, Richard: At the recent interim ALTO meeting (minutes at [1]), there was an action item for incr-updates-sse. The WG feels that this work is mature enough to move forward. Richard had noted that the I-D can benefit from some minor changes. Can you please post the status of the work besides Richard's comments, any known open issues, or any other items to get the WG caught up. Jan and I will use your post summary to move the work ahead. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2017-alto-01/materials/minutes-interim-2017-alto-01-201712180600/ Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] xdom-disc action needed
Sebastian, Martin: At the recent interim ALTO meeting (minutes at [1]), there was an action item for xdom-disc. The WG feels that this work is mature enough to move forward. Can you please post the status of the work, any known open issues, or any other items to get the WG caught up. Jan and I will use your post summary to move the work ahead. Thanks, [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2017-alto-01/materials/minutes-interim-2017-alto-01-201712180600/ - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Draft minutes from virtual interim
All: I have posted the draft minutes from the virtual interim at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2017-alto-01/materials/minutes-interim-2017-alto-01-201712180600/ Please eyeball and let me know of any updates or corrections. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Draft Agenda for ALTO Virtual Interim
All: The draft agenda for Monday's virtual meeting is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-interim-2017-alto-01-alto-01/ Please eyeball it to make sure that all your requests are included. Please send me and Jan PDFs of your slides by Sunday night. Please only send PDFs, not MS-Word or other formats. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] WebEx URL for virtual interim meeting (Dec-18-2017)
All: As we gear up for the virtual interim meeting on Dec-18, a quick reminder to please send agenda requests to Jan and me. In addition, here are the WebEx coordinates; please put these on your calendar. Date: Mon Dec-18-2017 Time: 1:00pm CET / 7:00am US Eastern / 8:00pm Beijing WebEx URL: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=mac822b97831bccbe7bccab5b627cb624 Meeting number (access code): 310 126 056 Meeting password: qDJpCJiT JOIN BY PHONE 1-877-668-4493 Call-in toll free number (US/Canada) 1-650-479-3208 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) Toll-free dialing restrictions: https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf Can't join the meeting? https://help.webex.com/docs/DOC-5412 Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] No meeting at IETF 100
Folks, as you may have seen from the mailing list, we are not planning to have a face-to-face meeting at IETF 100. Jan and I are, however, planning to solicit information from the WG on whether it wants to meet for a virtual meeting sometimes before the November IETF meeting. We will sync up and present some candidate dates next week and decide next steps for the virtual meeting. Please stay tuned. Cheers, - vijay ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] A virtual session at IETF 100?
Qiao, a virtual meeting is not tied to a physical one. We can schedule a virtual meeting anytime that the group agrees on, and we use Meetecho/WebEx to hold the virtual meeting from the comfort of our homes and offices. So, yes, we are not holding a physical meeting at IETF 100. Jan and I will circle back to the mailing list with a poll for if and when to hold a virtual meeting. Thanks, On 09/20/2017 04:03 PM, Qiao Xiang wrote: > Hi Jan, Vijay and all WG members, > > I received an email from IETF saying we will not hold a session at IETF > 100. Am I to correct to presume this means no f2f meeting at IETF 100, > but not for a virtual meeting? > > I am asking this because I recall that by the end of the ALTO session at > IETF 99 we agree that we would have a virtual meeting at IETF 100. I am > wondering do we have a tentative schedule on organizing this virtual > session? If there is anything that requires the efforts from the WG > member, I would be glad to help out. > > And the following are some quick updates from the drafts I am > contributing to: > > (1) For draft-xiang-alto-exascale-network-optimization-03 and > draft-gao-alto-routing-state-abstraction-06, we are making good progress > on the system design and implementation. We recently submitted a paper > to the INDIS workshop, and will do a full demonstration of multi-domain > resource orchestration at SuperComputing 2017 in Denver. We will update > these two drafts to report our latest design details in a couple of weeks. > > (2) For draft-gao-alto-fcs-03, Jensen, Kai and I have been discussing on > how to address the remaining design challenges. We haven't reached any > design decisions yet, but will do that by the end of October. > > > > > Best > Qiao > -- > Qiao Xiang > Postdoctoral Fellow, > Department of Computer Science, > Yale University -- Vijay K. Gurbani / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com Network Data Science, Nokia Networks Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Some comments on draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-07
Lyle, all: Correct; I believe W3C SSE is the right choice here. Many moons ago, when we were all very young (okay, ~3.5 years ago, but we were still younger), there were other contenders; websockets comes to mind [1]. But as the work progressed, it made sense to stick with W3C SSE. Cheers, [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-marocco-alto-ws-02 On 07/24/2017 12:49 PM, Lyle Bertz wrote: > All, > > I asked during the meeting about whether or not it made sense to look at > alternatives to W3C SSE. However, in subsequent WG meetings such as > netconf use of W3C SSE is the norm and the right way to go. > > tl;dr - don't change the draft - keep the use of W3C SSE. > > Lyle > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:14 PM, xin wang <xinwang2...@hotmail.com > <mailto:xinwang2...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > > Dear authors of ALTO Incremental Updates Using Server-Sent Events (SSE), > > > The draft about incremental updates by using Server-Sent Events > (SSE) proposes a general framework for incremental updates of > network information. The concept of update stream resource in the > framework allows a unified interface to ALTO clients. The interface > not only considers GET-mode ALTO services but also POST-mode > services, which should support most future extensions of ALTO > services. The following is my comments: > > > a. The benefits of the general framework > > > Besides of the extension-friendly design, I am thinking of other > benefits of bringing all ALTO services together by using a new > update stream resource. First, let me propose an alternative simple > solution of incremental updates. The solution views each > subscription independently, which means that each time a client > calls an ALTO service (e.g., get network-map) to get incremental > updating data, the server will establish a connection for the data. > Then, by comparing with the simple solution, we can find an obvious > benefit of the solution in the draft should be reducing redundant > connections. Also, another benefit would be that it makes removing > resources very easily. Though SSE itself supports disconnection API, > it will add new APIs to the simple solution. Moreover, because one > connection could manage multiple resources which may have > overlapping (also dependencies) between each other, I am considering > whether there exists an efficient way to make scheduling for > updating these resources. > > > b. Full replacement or incremental updates > > > In the client side, if the data is updated in incremental ways, then > there should be some algorithms to apply the updates like the > algorithm in Section 4.2.1. However, if the data allows full > replacement, then the client can easily replace the data with the > new one instead of applying the algorithms. Also, the > “incremental-updates” field is “true” indicates the server MAY send > incremental update events, which means that the client may receive > either a full replacement or incremental updates in each time (is > this right?). My idea is that if the response from the server can > indicate whether this update is a full replacement or incremental > one, the client should benefit from that. > > > Also, there are some typos may be fixed: > > > Page 10: "we now gives" -> "we now give"; > > Page 13: missing “)” in "(see Section 6.3.”; > > > Best, > > X.Tony Wang > > > > ___ > alto mailing list > alto@ietf.org <mailto:alto@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto> > > > > > ___ > alto mailing list > alto@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Missing presentations; please send ASAP
Folks: The following presentations have not been uploaded yet. Please send me and Jan a PDF as soon as you can. 1355 - 1410 15' ALTO cost context 1455 - 1500 05' ALTO cross-domain server discovery 1500 - 1509 09' ALTO cellular address extension Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Seeking WGLCs during Thursday meeting
Folks: As preparation for the Thu meeting, Jan and I will like the WG to focus on some documents that should be last called. These are: - draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar - draft-ietf-alto-incr-updates-sse - draft-ietf-alto-xdom-disc Please make sure that you read these documents before our Thu meeting so we are prepared to discuss them in the context of WGLC. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] alto Digest, Vol 104, Issue 7
Dawn: No worries, and thanks for attending to this. I appreciate it. Cheers, On 07/11/2017 09:36 PM, Dawn Chan wrote: > Hi Vijay, > Sorry for the mistake, we will resubmit the draft as > draft-ietf-alto-props-new-00 and thanks for the slot. >> On 11 Jul 2017, at 4:23 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani >> <vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com> wrote: >> >> On 07/10/2017 09:06 AM, Dawn Chan wrote: >>> Hi Vijay, >>> >>> I wanna to request a slot for unified property map: >>> >>> - draft-roome-alto-unified-props-new-01: 10-15 min, Richard Yang >> >> Dawn: A decision was made during the Chicago IETF [1] to adopt >> draft-roome-alto-unified-props-new as a WG item. As such, I am not >> sure why an individual version has been submitted as a revision to the >> IETF archives. >> >> Can you kindly resubmit the draft as >> draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-00 when the moratorium on new >> draft submission is raised. >> >> I am afraid that the request was submitted fairly late, and as such, the >> agenda is really full. However, since this is a WG chartered item, I >> will try to accommodate the draft. The most I will be able to do is a 5 >> minute slot. >> >> Thanks, >> >> [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/minutes/minutes-98-alto-00.txt >> >> - vijay >> -- >> Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks >> Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com >> Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani >> Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq > > - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Revised WG agenda for Prague IETF
On 07/10/2017 08:58 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote: > All: The revised WG agenda has been posted. As usual, we will spend the > bulk of the meeting on chartered items. > > We believe that we were able to honor all those that requested a slot. > Please take a look at the agenda and let Jan and me know if the revised > agenda is missing anything. One more revision of the draft agenda; please see https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/99/agenda/alto/ Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] alto Digest, Vol 104, Issue 7
On 07/10/2017 09:06 AM, Dawn Chan wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > I wanna to request a slot for unified property map: > > - draft-roome-alto-unified-props-new-01: 10-15 min, Richard Yang Dawn: A decision was made during the Chicago IETF [1] to adopt draft-roome-alto-unified-props-new as a WG item. As such, I am not sure why an individual version has been submitted as a revision to the IETF archives. Can you kindly resubmit the draft as draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-00 when the moratorium on new draft submission is raised. I am afraid that the request was submitted fairly late, and as such, the agenda is really full. However, since this is a WG chartered item, I will try to accommodate the draft. The most I will be able to do is a 5 minute slot. Thanks, [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/minutes/minutes-98-alto-00.txt - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Agenda requests
Folks: So far, Jan and I have received only one agenda request for the Prague IETF (from Qiao Xiang). If we are mistaken, please do let us know. The deadline for a draft agenda to be uploaded was earlier this week on Wednesday. The deadline for a revised agenda is Monday. Can you please send me and Jan a note asking for an agenda slot if you are interested in presenting work in Prague. As usual, preference will be given to chartered working group items that have witnessed a substantive discussion on the mailing list. Leftover time will be allocated to new, non-chartered work. Please send me and Jan the information in the following format: Name of presenter Length of presentation Associated drafts Please do so before Monday. Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com / v...@bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Adopting draft-seedorf-cdni-request-routing-alto
Folks: With respect to the call for adoption [1] sent out to ratify the face-to-face meeting hum on adopting draft-seedorf-cdni-request-routing-alto; this email serves as a confirmation of adoption. The list archive does not show anyone opposing the adoption. Thus, Jan (as co-chair) and I would like to offer the draft authors the opportunity to submit an appropriately named draft to the ALTO WG as a WG item. (The old name of the draft reflects its roots in the cdni WG.) Authors: Please do so as soon as possible to move the work ahead. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03411.html Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Meeting materials uploaded
Folks: All of the materials sent to the chairs has been uploaded. Please make sure that your PDF is in the meetings materials. If not, please send it to me and Jan ASAP by replying to this email. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Reminder: Slides due by Wed
Just a friendly reminder. Please convert to PDF and send them to me and Jan. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/vijay.gurbani Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Slides for Chicago IETF
Folks, please send me and Jan the slides you will be presenting on Friday. Please PDF your slides before sending them.Please send a version by Wednesday, you can always send an update.Thanks.___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Graph representation format deliverable as WG item
On 08/31/2016 03:54 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: Hi Vijay, all, Thanks a lot for the reminder. This is a keep-alive that the authors are doing the work and will post an outline to clarify to the WG on the path soon. Richard: Awesome! Thanks. - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] NomCom 2016-2017: Call for Nominations
The 2016-17 Nominating Committee (Nomcom) is seeking nominations from
now until October 8, 2016. The open positions being considered by this
year's Nomcom can be found at the end of this email and also on this
year's Nomcom website:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2016/
Nominations may be made by selecting the Nominate link at the top of
the Nomcom 2016 home page, or by visiting the following URL:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2016/nominate/
{Note that nominations made using the web tool require an ietf.org
datatracker account. You can create a datatracker ietf.org account
if you don't have one already by visiting the following URL:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/accounts/create/ }
If you are unable to use the web form, nominations may instead be made
by email to nomcom...@ietf.org. If using email, please include the word
"Nominate" in the Subject and indicate in the email who is being
nominated, their email address (to confirm acceptance of the
nomination), and the position for which you are making the nomination.
If you are nominating someone other than yourself, please tell us if
we may tell the nominee that you were the one who made the nomination.
If you wish to nominate someone via email for more than one position,
please use separate emails to do so.
Self-nomination is welcome!
Willing nominees will be asked to fill out a questionnaire
specific to the position for which they are nominated. The questionnaires
will be available on September 2, 2016 and have a submission deadline of
October 13, 2016.
NomCom 2016-17 will follow the policy for "Open Disclosure of Willing
Nominees" described in BCP 10/RFC 7437. As stated in RFC 7437: "The
list of nominees willing to be considered for positions under review
in the current Nomcom cycle is not confidential". Willing nominees for
each position will be listed in a publicly accessible way - anyone
with a datatracker account may access the lists. Additionally, the
nomination form asks if we may share your own name with the
nominee. In all other ways, the confidentiality requirements of BCP10
remain in effect. All feedback and all Nomcom deliberations will
remain confidential and will not be disclosed.
There is a field on the form you can mark in order to allow the Nomcom
to tell the nominee that you were the one who made the
nomination. This defaults to “no” - so if you don't mark the field
we won’t tell.
In order to ensure time to collect sufficient community feedback about
each of the willing nominees, nominations must be received by the
NomCom on or before October 8, 2016.
Please submit your nominations as early as possible for the sake of
your nominees. Note that nominations should not wait for management
permission, as it is easier to decline the nomination than put one in
late.
The Nomcom appoints individuals to fill the open slots on the IAOC,
the IAB, and the IESG. The list of people and posts whose terms end
with the March 2017 IETF meeting, and thus the positions for which
this Nomcom is responsible, follows:
IAOC
Lou Berger
IAB
Ralph Droms*
Russ Housley*
Robert Sparks
Andrew Sullivan
Dave Thaler*
Suzanne Woolf
IESG
Jari Arkko (GEN)*
Deborah Brungard (RTG)
Ben Campbell (ART)
Spencer Dawkins (TSV)
Stephen Farrell (SEC)*
Joel Jaeggli (OPS)*
Terry Manderson (INT)
Alvaro Retana (RTG)
*- have indicated that they do not intend to accept a
renomination. This information is always up to date on
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2016/
Please be resourceful in identifying possible candidates for these
positions, as developing our talent is a very crucial requirement for
the IETF, and also, please consider accepting a nomination. You'll
find extensive information about specific positions, developed by the
IAB, IESG, and IAOC, under individual tabs at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2016/requirements/
In addition to nominations, the Nomcom seeks community input on the
positions themselves. We need and welcome the community's views and
input on the jobs within each organization. If you have ideas on the
positions' responsibilities (more, less, different), please let us
know.
Please send suggestions and feedback about this to nomcom...@ietf.org.
Thank you for your help in identifying qualified nominees!
Lucy Lynch
Nomcom Chair 2016-17
nomcom-chair-2...@ietf.org
lly...@civil-tongue.net
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Graph representation format deliverable as WG item
Authors: Pursuant to the call for adoption issued on the mailing list [1] on Aug-01-2016 for a pair of documents to be considered as the deliverable for the graph representation charter item, it appears that there is strong support (as expressed on the mailing list) for doing so. However, things remain unclear still as to the path the authors propose to take to see the individual drafts adopted into one or more WG items (please see [1] as well). The chairs ask the authors to please shed some clarity on this and prepare to submit the revised draft (or drafts) as WG -00 item(s). This should be done preferably sooner rather than later. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03244.html Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Submitting draft-wu-alto-te-metrics as a WG item
Authors: Pursuant to the call for adoption for draft-wu-alto- te-metrics as a WG item issued on the mailing list [1] on Jul-28-2016, it appears that there is strong support (as expressed on the mailing list) for doing so. In the call for adoption [1], the chairs raised a couple of issues that should be addressed: 1) privacy aspects, 2) harmonize work with IPPM To date, to the best of the chair's knowledge, the authors have not responded to these issues on the list. Jan and I would, therefore, urge the authors to address these issues to satisfaction of the WG as they work on the WG item -00 revision. It will be good to have the revision submitted, or at least some discussion started on how these issues will be addressed, as soon as possible. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03245.html Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Submitting draft-kiesel-alto-xdom-disc a WG item
Authors: Pursuant to the call for adoption for draft-kiesel-alto-xdom-disc as a WG item issued on the mailing list [1] on Jul-28-2016, it appears that there is support (as expressed on the mailing list) for doing so. Consequently, can you please revise the document and resubmit it as a -00 WG document as soon as possible. [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03238.html Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Call for adoption: ALTO traffic engineering cost metrics
Folks: As the (draft) minutes [1] of IETF 96 reflect, there was general consensus on adoption of the ALTO traffic engineering cost metrics (draft-wu-alto-te-metrics-08) draft as a deliverable towards protocol extensions to convey a richer set of attributes. Some concern was expressed on the list about the the privacy aspects related to sharing some of the metrics. These metrics remain optional, and an ALTO server that does not want to provide these is not bound to do so. There was also advice from the AD to harmonize this work with the metric registry work being done in IPPM. The chairs would like the authors to ensure that the above two items are reflected in any discussion that arises in the context of adopting this draft as a working group item. The call for adoption runs for two weeks, from Mon Aug 1, 2016 to Mon Aug 15, 2016. This will be a good time to comment on the list and inform the working group of any issues with adopting this items, or whether the working group was remiss in considering other documents. Please post to the list. (Even a simple "I support this document towards charter deliverable" is a good indication.) Thanks, [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/minutes/minutes-96-alto - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Call for adoption: Adopting graph representation format deliverables
Folks: As the (draft) minutes [1] of IETF 96 reflect, there was general consensus on adoption of path vector and routing state abstraction documents towards the charter deliverable of graph representation formats in ALTO. The chairs will like to start a call for adoption of the two documents --- https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yang-alto-path-vector-03 and https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gao-alto-routing-state-abstraction-03 --- as deliverables towards the charter item. Note that there remains some ambiguity (in the chair's mind) on whether, once adopted, these will proceed as two drafts or whether they will be merged in one. The authors of these drafts are urged to provide clarity on the evolution of these documents. The call for adoption runs for two weeks, from Mon Aug 1, 2016 to Mon Aug 15, 2016. This will be a good time to comment on the list and inform the working group of any issues with adopting these items, or whether the working group was remiss in considering other documents. Please post to the list. (Even a simple "I support these documents towards charter deliverable" is a good indication.) Thanks, [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/minutes/minutes-96-alto - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Adopting draft-randriamasy-alto-cost-calendar-06 as WG item
Folks: During the Berlin IETF, a hum was taken to determine if the WG should adopt draft-randriamasy-alto-cost-calendar-06 as one of the WG documents towards fulfilling the deliverable on "a richer set of attributes to allow applications to determine not only "where" to connect but also "when" to connect." As the minutes reflect [1], the in-room and Jabber attendees were in favour of adopting draft-randriamasy-alto-cost-calendar-06 as one of the documents that goes towards fulfilling the charter deliverables. Consequently, this communication serves to ratify the decision reached during the face-to-face meeting on the mailing list. If anyone has an objection to adopting the document, please state, on the mailing list, the objection supported by reasons why the document should not be adopted. Please indicate any objections by Thu, August 7, 2016. Hearing no objections by that date, Jan and I will like to request that the authors prepare a WG -00 version of the document and submit it to the IETF achives. [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/minutes/minutes-96-alto Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] A unified approach to value schemas and ALTO maps
[As an individual, of course] On 07/27/2016 09:10 AM, Wendy Roome wrote: Vijay, It would not obsolete rfc7285, but it would deprecate much of it. An ALTO server would continue to provide network maps, cost maps, ECS, EPS, etc, as in 7285. Deprecating rfc7285 is not a viable option at this point, at least in my opinion. I think this will add a level of uncertainty to pending work that may be detrimental and slow down the progress that we witnessed at the Berlin IETF. I am not being obtuse, of course, just pragmatic. But new work & extensions would use the new presentation scheme. The new format resources can co-exist in the IRD with the rfc7285 resources. Ideally, an ALTO server would provide cost map resources in both old & new formats, via different resource entries in the IRD. Ultimately whether to go this route is something that the WG will have to decide collectively, but my personal opinion is that "here there be dragons" :-) Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Draft minutes from IETF 96
On 07/26/2016 09:53 AM, Jensen Zhang wrote: It seems that some notes below Flow Cost Service are about Cross-Domain Server Discovery. Jensen: Ah yes. Thanks! I was typing notes for xdom in fcs. Thanks for finding and fixing these. I moved them to notes for corss-domain discovery. Also, fixed some typos. Cool. Uploaded the latest version. See https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/minutes/minutes-96-alto Thanks! - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Draft minutes from IETF 96
All: Jan and I would like to thank you all (in person attendees as well as remote attendees) for a very fruitful meeting in Berlin. The draft minutes, distilled from minutes provided by Lyle Bertz and Sabine Randriamasy (thanks!), are posted at https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/minutes/minutes-96-alto Please take a look at them and make sure they reflect the consensus we reached during the WG meeting. We took a couple of hums during the meeting and Jan and I will be following up on ratifying these on the mailing list. Please pay particular attention to the hums in the minute to make sure we captured all relevant discussions. If you find any errors or omissions with respect to the minutes, please post changes on list and edit the document. We have posted the minutes in Etherpad (see http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/notes-ietf-96-alto?useMonospaceFont=true). Please indicate your name in Etherpad and update the errors/omissions as needed. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Check uploaded slides, please
Folks: Jan and I have uploaded the slides sent to us so far. Please go to the meeting material manager (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/96/materials.html/) and make sure that your slides have been uploaded. For those of you who have sent us updated versions, please make sure that the version available is the last one you sent us. (Please make sure you erase your cache so when you download the updated slide- show you will get the latest one.) Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] draft-cai-nfvrg-recursive-monitor
On 07/18/2016 03:56 AM, Lyle Bertz wrote: All, Am I off track here or can ALTO pick this up rather easily? Link: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cai-nfvrg-recursive-monitor-00 Hmmm ... speaking as 1/2 the chair of course, there is certainly no charter item against which ALTO can adopt this draft. Process-wise, I don't know off hand whether a WG can add a new deliverable without re-chartering. But the broader question is what prompted you to correlate the draft with ALTO. I could be missing something here, of course, but my quick scanning of the draft seems that it is a bit orthogonal to ALTO. But as I said ... I may be missing something important. - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Slides for ALTO meeting
Folks: Please convert your slides to PDF and send it to me and Jan as soon as you can, but preferably before Monday. You can always send us updated versions. Please convert them to PDF first. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Adopting draft-kiesel-alto-xdom-disc as WG item?
Folks: One of the deliverables on our charter is "Submit alternative server discovery document." For a while now, Sebastian has been presenting his work in the form of draft-kiesel-alto-xdom-disc [1] that may address this deliverable. At the Prague IETF where this work was last discussed [2,3], the understanding was that the WG should start looking at this draft with an eye towards adopting it as a WG item. Sebastian has a slot at the Berlin IETF, so Jan and I will like to take this time to request the WG to kindly read the draft and be prepared to discuss adopting it as a WG item. (This will be ratified on the list after the meeting, of course.) So, please do spend a few minutes thinking about the draft with respect to fulfilling the charter deliverable as our meeting approaches. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kiesel-alto-xdom-disc-02 [2] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/minutes/minutes-93-alto [3] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-alto-10.pdf Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Updated ALTO WG (draft) agenda
Folks: The ALTO WG agenda has been updated to include a request that escaped our attention. The uodated agenda is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/96/agenda/alto/ Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] DRAFT IETF 96 agenda
Folks: The draft agenda for IETF 96 is at https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/agenda/agenda-96-alto Please eyeball it to make sure that if you sent Jan and me a request, your name appears on the agenda. Note that we have had to shave some minutes off what was requested to ensure that we fulfilled all of the requests we received. Please let Jan and me know if we (inadvertently) forgot any request received. As usual, this is a draft agenda until finalized. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] IETF 96 agenda requests
On 07/05/2016 12:25 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: Vijay, Please see inline. [...] OK. We should target posting a spec by this Friday so that we can discuss the spec before the meeting, to remove any confusion/bewilderment. Since the key piece is encoding specification of (1) graph; and (2) path vector associated w/ a graph. We will target posting those spec, precisely first. Richard: Awesome! Thanks. - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] IETF 96 agenda requests
On 07/05/2016 12:17 PM, Y. Richard Yang wrote: It indeed is a good time to quickly converge on the exact encoding details so that we can move forward. This should be a high priority item and let's work out the details during this IETF. I will focus on it and propose an encoding shortly. Excellent. This will go a long way to convergence and uniform understanding. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] IPR disclosure on ietf-alto-alto-deployments
Folks: Pursuant to Mirja's email [1], Jan and I take this opportunity to remind anyone on the list to respond with any concerns on moving draft-ietf-alto-deployments forward. It is imperative that the bounds of this discussion are understood uniformly, and these are: There is no IPR being claimed against draft- ietf-alto-deployments. The draft simply appears as a reference in patent applications. Patent applications routinely include references to other patents, academic papers, and standards documents. However, each such reference is not an IPR declaration. In this particular case, draft-ietf-alto-deployments is a general (informative) draft that explains the use of ALTO in various scenarios, and has been used as a reference in patent applications. The draft itself is not suggesting any specific method or processes that are subject to IPR. Furthermore, in the particular case of draft-ietf-alto-deployments, the authors of the patent applications in question have stated that the draft itself is not subject to IPR protection and can proceed. As such, the chairs and AD are of the opinion that the draft can proceed. Please let us know if you disagree and state your opinion on the disagreement to the list. Thanks, [1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03096.html - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Ben Campbell's No Objection ondraft-ietf-alto-deployments-15:(with COMMENT)
On 06/29/2016 12:28 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: [...] All that being said, I think the real answer is that you should discuss this with Mirja to decide how to proceed. Ben: Perfect. Thank you. Jan and I will follow up with Mirja and circle back to the WG list. Cheers, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-alto-deployments-15:(with COMMENT)
On 06/29/2016 11:28 AM, Ben Campbell wrote: I wasn't trying to judge the applicability so much as the intent, but I take your point. My real concern at this point is that the working group has the opportunity to decide how to proceed. Ben, all: So, is that the answer to my previous query on what is the expected process to relieve the burden of such IPR declarations and move the work ahead? If it falls in the purview of the WG, then certainly Jan and I can drive the discussions in the WG. Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] IETF 96 agenda requests
Folks: Please send me and Jan agenda requests for the ALTO WG meeting in IETF. We have a 2 hour slot on Thu afternoon (July 21). Specifically: - Presenter name - Time requested (in minutes) - Internet-Draft to be discussed As usual, drafts that have seen list discussions will be given precedence when scheduling the agenda. As you are all aware, the deployment draft is now with the IESG. As per our last meeting (virtual interm [1]), we need to move two drafts ahead: (1) draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost-01 needs to be scheduled for a WGLC, and (2) draft-randriamasy-alto-cost-calendar-05 needs to be open up to being adopted as a WG item. Jan and I will like to start proceeding on this perhaps as early as next week. [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2015/10/27/alto/minutes/minutes-interim-2015-alto-1 Thank you, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks 1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA) Email: v...@bell-labs.com / vijay.gurb...@nokia-bell-labs.com Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Fwd: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-alto-deployments-15
Folks: deployment-considerations document has moved ahead. Thanks for all of the hard work in getting this out. Cheers, - vijay Forwarded Message Subject: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-alto-deployments-15 Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 08:49:35 -0700 From: Vijay K. Gurbani <vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com> To: i...@kuehlewind.net CC: alto-cha...@ietf.org, iesg-secret...@ietf.org, v...@bell-labs.com Vijay Gurbani has requested publication of draft-ietf-alto-deployments-15 as Informational on behalf of the ALTO working group. Please verify the document's state at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-deployments/ ___ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] WG chair review of draft-ietf-alto-deployments-14
the Internet. Thus, an ISP may be an NSP but the
reverse is not true. I don't know whether you want to make this
distinction
or not, but thought I'd point it out.
There are different definitons of NSP around. Another common one would
be a "wholesale ISP" or what is usually called a Tier-1 carrier.
Or something like the IT department of a company, which does not only
provide bare Internet Connectivity, but also, say, file storage on
"network drives", etc.
I think the best thing to do would be to go through the whole section
and replace all occurences of ISP and NSP by network operator.
I will leave it to you to decide whether to do this or not.
- S3.1.5, first paragraph: s/, e.g.,//
why? "exposing network performance information" is only one thing
an alto server can do.
OK, leave as is.
- S3.2.4, first bullet under "Distance-related rating criteria:"
s/values, and the ALTO client will not be informed about the
nature of the
information./values.
why?
this sentence has two aspects:
- the server is free to chose how to compute the values, and
- the server does not even have to tell the client how he did it
both are important
OK, in that case, I would suggest
s/nature of the information./nature of the computation./
This makes it more direct that there are two aspects as you point
out above.
- S3.5.3, first paragraph: The key point here is that the cellular wireless
bandwidth is a constrained resource, normal wireless (IEEE 802.11)
is not as
much constrained as the cellular data network. My suggestion would be to
simply s/wireless bandwidth/cellular wireless bandwidth/
not sure why we need the distinction between 802.11 and cellular here.
both are less preferred than wireline.
we could do a four-tier example:
preference(true wireline clients) >
preference(wifi clients behind access points hooked up to the wireline
internet access by the paying customers) >
preference(wifi clients at access points operated by the ISP) >
preference(cellular clients)
but this goes way beyond what we need.
We don't need to do a four-tier example, but clearly you will agree that
the characteristics of the cellular bandwidth (of the kind provided by
an operator) are much different than those of WiFi bandwidth. The
resources in the former are scarcer than those in the latter. All this
said, I re-read the portion in question and perhaps the best thing to
do is to just leave it as is. So, much ado about nothing :-)
- S3.5.3, Figure 13: For the sake of completeness and symmetry, you should
specify the costs for the links that joins (PID 3, PID 1), as well as the
text that makes it costly for peers in PID 3 to get content from
PID 1, but
not as costly to get content from PID 2.
Who contributed this example? Hans? Can you do that?
Will need to close this soon. Can you please drive this to completion
with Hans?
- S3.6.1, Figure 15: What would be good is if the link weights in
this figure
were also reflected in Figure 14. That way, later on when one is
interpreting the hopcount cost map (Figure 20), it is easy to see
that the
path weight between R1->R3->R4->R9 is 40.
Who contributed this example? Hans? Can you do that?
Will need to close this soon. Can you please drive this to completion
with Hans?
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] WG chair review of draft-ietf-alto-deployments-14
On 05/09/2016 03:56 PM, Sebastian Kiesel wrote:
Hi Vijay,
all,
I started integrating Vijay's comments into the document.
While most of the proposed changes make the language more readable and
beautiful, some also slightly change the meaning of the statements, so
we need to consider what/how to change.
please see below. [...]
Sebastian: I will get back to you early next week with resolution to the
questions you have on my review.
Thanks for a close read. I believe we should be able to converge next
week and get the document out of the WG.
More then.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Berlin meeting request for 2 hour slot
On 05/03/2016 04:25 AM, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR) wrote:
Hi Vijay,
Thank you for the information. In the "Conflict to Avoid - First
priority list", I suggest we also add SDNRG.
Sabine: Good idea. I will do so.
Ciao,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] WG chair review of draft-ietf-alto-deployments-14
On 04/28/2016 01:18 PM, Sebastian Kiesel wrote:
In this document, in particular in Sec. 4.2.2, "ressource directory"
is used as an abstract term for BitTorrent trackers and similar
entities, i.e., something in the "signaling plane" or the like, which
is not the endpoint of the bulk data transmissions that we we want to
optimize.
The usage of this term is consistent with RFC 5693 (ALTO problem
statement), which defines:
Resource Directory: An entity that is logically separate from the
resource consumer and that assists the resource consumer to
identify a set of resource providers. Some P2P applications refer
to the resource directory as a P2P tracker.
This term coined in the very early days of ALTO is not to be confused
Information Resource Directory (IRD) defined in RFC 7285 (ALTO protocol).
We will add a clarification that the RFC 5693 definition is meant.
OK, I had forgotten about the use of that early meaning!
Yes, that will work; probably just say that "We use the term Resource
Directory as defined in RFC5693, which defines it as an entity that is
logically separate from the resource consumer and that assists the
resource consumer to identify a set of resource providers. This use
of the term is different than the usage ascribed to the term Information
Resource Directory defined in RFC7286. For the remainder of this
document, the term Resource Directory is to be interpreted as defined in
RFC5693."
That will do it.
The other issues (below) seem to be mostly editorial stuff - we will
take care of them.
Sounds good. Thanks a lot. As soon as I see a revision, I can send the
document to IESG.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Proto writeup for ALTO deployment draft
On 04/07/2016 04:19 AM, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) wrote:
Vijay,
You could perhaps note that relevant parts of the document are backed
by implementations and/or experiments.
For instance, for section 3.2 (and Section 6.1) an implementation has
been reported to the
WG:https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg02202.html
(the link now seems to
behttp://www.ewsdn.eu/files/Presentations/EWSDN%202013/2_3_Dynamic_VPN_optimization.pdf)
More details can be found in: [...]
Michael: Reports of implementation and experiments are absolutely
crucial in the proto-writeup of a document that standardizes a
protocol (a la rfc7285, the ALTO protocol RFC). In our case here, we
are not standardizing ALTO as much as we are documenting the state
of acceptance, use, and deployment of ALTO in current networks.
All that said, documents --- even Informational-track ones --- do not
exist in a vacuum, and you have rightly pointed out relevant
publications do exist. As such, I do agree with you and will put
in the references you suggested in the final proto-writeup.
Thanks for collecting the references.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Proto writeup for ALTO deployment draft
All: I am the shepherd for the ALTO deployment draft. The draft
is close to being done and the working group is awaiting the release
of version -14.
In preparation of moving the draft ahead when version -14 becomes
available, I have filled in the proto-writeup as indicated below.
Let me know of any issues and concerns with the writeup.
Thanks.
1. Summary.
Vijay K. Gurbani is the document shepherd for draft-alto-deployments draft.
Spencer Dawkins was the responsible AD throughout the last few versions
of the
draft, however, that benefit transferred to Mirja Kuhlewind around IETF 95
(Buenos Aires).
The document itself has a long and varied history, having started life
off as
a -00 document targeted to the ALTO WG as an individual (original authors:
Martin Stiemerling and Sebsatian Kiesel, March 1, 2010). It
transitioned to a
WG document in February 2011 with the original two authors and continued on
revision trajectory until version -04 when new authors were added.
The document distills and prescribes recommendations for network
administrators and application designers planning to deploy ALTO, including
recommendations on how to generate the ALTO map information and known
limitations of the ALTO protocol (rfc7285). Furthermore, the document
provides guidance for the use of ALTO in diverse environments, including P2P
traffic optimization, CDN considerations, application guidance in VPNs, to
name a few examples.
The working group is targeting this document as an Informational, which
is the
appropriate track the document should be on based on the nature of its
prescriptions and recommendations. The document does not introduce any new
protocol elements, nor does it subvert --- positively or negatively --- the
usage of the protocol in any given particular environment (i.e., CDNs, VPNs,
or P2P environments).
2. Review and Consensus.
The draft has consensus from the WG and has been well-reviewed. There have
been two WGLCs for this draft: Version -11 of the draft was last-called
between the time period of April 28, 2015 to May 17, 2015. During this
period, the draft was reviewed in detail by Wendy Roome. Wendy found
several
minor issues and nits and a couple of major issues, all of which were
readily addressed in version -12 (June 2015).
Pursuant to an ALTO virtual meeting held on October 27, 2015, it became
apparent that draft-siedel-alto-map-calculation could inform
draft-ietf-alto-deployments. The authors of the two drafts were
requested to
make a determination whether portions of the former could be included in the
latter. By November 2015, a determination was made that relevant portions
from the map-calculation draft could be put into the
deployment-considerations
draft. The issue at hand after this was done was whether the changes
percolated widely enough to have a second WGLC. By Jan 2016, it was decided
that a second WGLC was likely, and thus a second one was issued that ended
on February 3, 2016. The second WGLC was reviewed by Sabine Randriamasy,
resulting in version -14 that addressed her review.
In summary, the deployment draft has had excellent support from the working
group, has been reviewed on multiple occasions by various members of the
working group and has been last-called twice to account for the expanded
role
it took on as the working group became aware of the growing deployment
of the
ALTO protocol.
3. Intellectual Property.
The shepherd confirms that each author has stated to him (and ALTO
co-chairs)
their direct, personal knowledge that the authors are not aware of any IPR
related to this document.
To the best of the shepherd's knoweldge, there has not been any
discussions on
IPR related to this document on the ALTO WG mailing list.
4. Other Points.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] Rebooting ALTO (or how to avoid the "low energy" label)
Qin Wu writes:
Hi, Vijay:
Thank for raising discussion on this.
Qin: Thanks for starting a discussion on this. I was wondering why no
one had picked up on the mail to start a thread.
Socializing multi-cost and alto-calendar is a good idea, I also think
we should socialize ALTO cost metric draft since this draft is a
companion document of alto-calendar draft and it interacts with many
routing area WGs on how to use measurement data provided by routing
system data source and RFC7471 and RFC7752 even provide a clear ALTO
use case.
Great. I would think that you'd want to be in a position by the
Berlin IETF to make a short presentation to RTG area to intimate the
WGs there on the draft.
We authors plan to revive alto te metric draft and keep on proceeding
it in the upcoming IETF meeting.
Good.
Regarding developing policy using ALTO or JSON, I am afraid this has
potential overlapping with SUPA since YANG defined policy can be
translated into either XML format or JSON format and YANG is used to
generate API, it could be RESTful API or PlugRestful API. Do we think
ALTO is another modeling language besides YANG?
Is ALTO a modeling language? I don't think so. But I will be the first
to admit that my YANG knowledge is not up to par with that of others in
the working group, who I hope will hold a more insightful discussion on
this topic, and in the process educate me.
Clearly, the emergence of YANG has stymied the efforts of certain work
items in ALTO. It will be an excellent start for someone (Richard Y?)
to provide a summary on the relevant issues we need to discuss here
to move some of the work forward and indeed, to formulate a response
--- if one is needed --- on the use of YANG in ALTO.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Rebooting ALTO (or how to avoid the "low energy" label)
Folks: Pursuant to the "State of the WG" thread [1], a number of
WG participants (Richard Y., Sabine R., Wendy R., Jensen Z., Gao, K)
exchanged some thoughts as a prelude to a larger WG discussion. This
email serves as a summary of the the ideas exchanged by them and the
start of a larger WG discussion.
Clearly there is a need to reboot ALTO.
The protocol is stable, the abstractions in the protocol (PID, endpoint
cost service, network maps) are sound and very useful, but perhaps what
is lacking is a proselytizing push of the protocol to other WGs who may
have an interest in the capabilities offered by ALTO but may not be
aware of it.
Richard Yang noted that there is a large body of interest in ALTO
outside of the IETF:
- The ALTO project in OpenDaylight [2]
- Use of ALTO at Yale, Caltech, and other institutions (Richard,
please fill in with more communities of interest ...)
- Early use of ALTO in service provider networks
This is a good sign in the generality of the protocol and the acceptance
of it.
Beyond this, there are other avenues that hold promise to raise the
profile of ALTO:
1) At the risk of wading into politics, the WG has to avoid the "low-
energy" label, which has known to be detrimental in other non-technical
spheres. To this extent, the larger working group has to be more
engaged in list discussions, reviewing documents, and evangelizing the
protocol within IETF. The WG has seen strong contributions from Lyle
Bertz, Haibin Song, Lingli Deng, among others, and these contributions
are very much appreciated and encouraged. A number of WG participants
have been reviewing documents over the last few weeks. A note of
appreciation to Gao Kai, Jensen Zheng, and Qiao Xiang is in order ...
thanks to all.
2) Take a look at other WGs to see how ALTO may help. Sdnrg, i2rs and
supa come to mind, although this is by no means an exhaustive list.
The work in ALTO on multi-cost and alto-calendar may could be of
interest to sdnrg and should be shared with them more formally.
Regarding i2rs, while ALTO will not --- and should not --- serve as a
southbound interface, it has the capacity and capability to serve as
one of the northbound interfaces [3].
Supa develops models to express policies using YANG, could it also
develop policies using ALTO? Clearly, YANG and ALTO are oriented
towards two different layers, the former is designed for controlling
and querying network devices while the latter has strong high-level
abstractions (PID, endpoint cost service, network maps) that aid in
reasoning at higher levels. While YANG is predominantly focused on
fixed networks, ALTO abstractions are useful regardless of fixed,
wireless, or cellular networks. Can supa use these abstractions to
develop policies for applications?
3) Evangelize/proselytize/market ALTO in area-wide meetings, such as
tsvarea or opsarea. The plan is to prepare an overview of the ALTO
protocol and its advantages in time for a slot at the Berlin IETF
tsvarea meeting.
So ... what to you folks think? How do we reboot ALTO and maintain its
relevance? Any further thoughts and ideas expressing them would be
great.
Thanks for reading so far!
[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg02996.html
[2] https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/ALTO:Main
[3] Gurbani, V.K., Scharf, M., Lakshman, T.V. and Hilt, V.,
"Abstracting network state in Software Defined Networks (SDN) for
rendezvous services," In Workshop on Software Defined Networks (SDN),
held in conjunction with IEEE International Conference on
Communications (ICC), June 2012.
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] No F2F meeting in Buenos Aires
Folks: Pursuant to the low responses for a ping on the mailing list [1]
about ongoing work and the need to meet physically at Buenos Aires, it
appears that we will NOT be meeting in Buenos Aires. The plan is to
meet in Berlin in the summer.
Jan and I will be back in touch on next steps to move pending work items
ahead.
[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/aNnWzhDhFSt0Ws_YZ-7VuW7LWps
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] State of the WG
On 02/05/2016 11:56 AM, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR) wrote:
All in all, thanks for this clarified and enriched version of
draft-ietf-alto-deployments. I found no major issues but some
sentences need to be re-formulated and figures need be referenced in
the text. Don't hesitate to get back to me if needed.
Sabine: Awesome! On behalf of the chairs, thanks for taking the time
to review the updated document.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] State of the WG
Folks: The mailing list has been awfully quiet.
Presently, we have 3 active I-Ds that are being tracked towards charter
fulfillment:
1. draft-ietf-alto-deployments is in its second WGLC. The new WGLC ends
on February 3, 2016.
2. draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse appears to be moving along and there
do not seem to be any stop gap issues that we are aware of. Authors,
please inform the WG if there are.
3. draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost is also fairly mature.
It seems reasonable to move 2 and 3 ahead.
Then there are a number of independent submissions dating back to Sep-
Oct 2015 timeframe. These have not been updated and nor has there been
much discussion on the mailing list. Some of these submissions are
important for charter deliverables related to graph representation
formats. Can the authors of the independent submissions kindly
share what their plans are with respect to the drafts?
This will help us gauge whether or not we should meet face-to-face in
Buenos Aires or have an interim meeting before it and meet face-to-face
in Berlin.
Note that while the final plans are still up in the air and subject
to change, there is a good chance that neither Jan or I will be able to
make it to Buenos Aires. However, if a F2F meeting is desired, it is
important to get a sense of the energy behind the independent drafts,
as the list traffic has been woefully quiet on this front.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] draft-ietf-alto-deployments-13
Hi all,
Based on a suggestion of the chairs I have looked into how to include
parts of draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation in
draft-ietf-alto-deployments. [...]
I would like to ask the chairs to run a new WGLC in order to finally
move this document forward.
Folks: Happy new year to all of you.
Version -13 is a culmination of the effort to merge
draft-ietf-alto-deployments and the individual effort of
draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation as we have discussed in the past.
Given the changes in the merged draft, Jan and I will issue a new WGLC.
We will follow this up in a separate email, in the meantime, please
consider spending some cycles to go through -13.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Second WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-deployments-13
[New email with appropriate subject to make it easier to search in
the archives.]
All: Michael and Hans have merged draft-ietf-alto-deployments and
draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation into version -13.
Given the non-trivial (but important) changes in the draft, we will
issue a second WGLC for this work.
The WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-deployments-13 commences today and will
end on Wednesday, February 3, 2016.
Can Jan and I request the reviewers who had reviewed version -11 to
please look at version -13; Wendy Roome was one of them. Wendy, can you
kindly review -13?
Other members of the WG are also urged to review the draft and post
comments on or before February 3, 2016.
Thank you,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Nokia
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@nokia.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Update on ALTO deployment considerations and map calculation draft
Folks: A quick update.
You may recall that I had asked [1] the authors of draft-
ietf-alto-deployments and draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation to
determine whether portions from the latter draft could be included in
the former.
There seem to be reasonable agreement on the list that the inclusion
would be a good thing. The question was whether we will issue a new
WGLC for the deployment draft if it includes text from the
map-calculation draft.
Michael Scharf (editor of the deployment draft) is taking the lead in
determining the shape of the inclusion. He will coordinate with Hans
(author of the map calculation draft) and advise the working group
soon as to next steps. I expect this to be soon (within days instead
of months).
As soon as we hear from Michael, we will move ahead with the deployment
draft.
[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/wCdNIO6AxWUYns2A8z39oiXYBxU
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] ALTO deployment considerations and map calculation draft
Michael, Hans: Pursuant to our virtual meeting yesterday, I have been
thinking whether Hans' draft [1] has any input that can go into
Michael's deployment draft [2]?
Can I kindly request the authors to inform the working group if there
is any beneficial overlap from [1] that we may take into [2]? I
realize that [2] has been through WGLC so I am not expecting
large-scale changes in it. But if there is any deployment-related
experience from [1] that can be put into [2], we should do our due
diligence and make sure that we reflect that experience.
Thanks!
[1] http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation/
[2] http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-deployments/
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
Re: [alto] ALTO deployment considerations and map calculation draft
Richard Yang wrote:
Vijay, Michael,
[...]
I liked draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation, and support that we report
the results in an RFC.
Richard, whether and in which track draft-siedel-...-calculation moves
ahead will get hashed out on the list, I am sure. Probably sooner
rather than later.
I share the same interest: completing the deployment doc soon. One
procedural question. If we add content from
draft-seidel-alto-map-calculation to the deployment doc, do we need
to go through a WGLC again?
If we end up taking some text from draft-siedel-...-calculation, then
yes, we'd socialize the change with the WG. However, it does not have
to be a WGLC again, just a revision that presents the newly added text
to the WG.
In the past, I have authored drafts and been part of WGs where new text
is added after the WGLC. The change gets socialized, and if the feeling
in the WG is that the change is substantial, then a second WGLC may get
issued. However, I don't think that will be the case here. I suspect
we can identify if there is any information we can carry into
draft-...-deployment-considerations, and if so we can revise the draft
to socialize the change and move it ahead.
The bigger issue is finding the time for the authors (or list members)
to scan draf-siedel-...-calculation and see if there is any text that
is worth including in draft-...-deployment-considerations. The sooner
this happens, the better.
Hans, Michael: If you could devote a bit of time to determining this,
it'll be great.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Thank you for a productive meeting
Folks: Thank you for a productive meeting today. The agenda was full
but we managed to plough through it.
There were a number of important outcomes that I will summarize on the
list through the minutes this week.
Thanks to the May and Richard Yang who took notes. Please send me the
notes at your earliest convenience.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Reminder: Virtual interim meeting on Tue, Oct 27 2015
Folks: Just a quick reminder for the virtual interim meeting.
Meeting logistics at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/9gmWXQKDlBDIVbKLBf6pGdm4Cq0
Agenda and slides at
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2015/10/27/alto/proceedings.html
To save time, if I can have a couple of note takers that will be great.
Send me and Jan email if you are interested.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Note takers, take 2
So, no one beat a path to our doors yet.
I do need two note takers. Don't disappear, please volunteer :-)
There will be a jabber room. Folks who want to "queue up to the mic"
may want to indicate their queueing through jabber.
Room: alto, Server: jabber.ietf.org
I will monitor the jabber channel.
Cheers,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Slides uploaded for Tue virtual meeting
Folks: The slides Jan and I have received so far have been uploaded.
Please go to:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2015/10/27/alto/proceedings.html
and make sure that your specific talk has been uploaded correctly.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Slides for ALTO virtual interim meeting
Folks: Please send me and Jan the slides for the ALTO virtual meeting
by Sunday, Oct. 25, 2015. Please convert your slides to PDF format
before sending them to us.
The virtual meeting is scheduled for Tue, Oct 27, 2015 [1].
[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/9gmWXQKDlBDIVbKLBf6pGdm4Cq0
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Reminder: agenda requests for virtual interim
Folks: So far we have not received any agenda requests. The deadline is
Wed, Oct. 7 2015 to get the agenda requests to Jan and me.
Kindly send me and Jan agenda requests using the following template:
Title:
Presenter:
Draft:
Time needed:
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] ALTO virtual interim meeting save the date
Folks: Based on the Doodle poll [1], the date that works with the most
number of people who responded is Tue, Oct 27 2015 at 8:00am US Central.
Conversion to your local timezones can seen at [2].
Please mark the date. The virtual meeting will be for 2 hours.
For now, please save the date. Logistics (webex, call-in, etc.) will
be provided in a follow up email.
Thank you,
[1] http://doodle.com/poll/4p7ku7uk3duiemwi
[2]
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ALTO+Virtual+Meeting=20151027T08=64=2
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
[alto] Agenda requests for virtual meeting
Folks: In preparation for the virtual meeting, kindly send me and Jan
agenda requests using the following template:
Title:
Presenter:
Draft:
Time needed:
Please send the request latest by Wed, October 7 2015, close of business
local time. We will publish a draft agenda shortly after that.
As always, preference will be given to those drafts that are engendering
discussions on the mailing list.
Thank you,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurb...@alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/ | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
