Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO
Christian Esteve Rothenberg <chesteve@dca.fee.unicamp.br> Mon, 11 June 2018 16:06 UTC
Return-Path: <chesteve@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99045130E3B for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.422
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.422 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ib-kmW1bHq4e for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com (mail-wm0-f65.google.com [74.125.82.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9207D1277BB for <alto@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id v16-v6so15657296wmh.5 for <alto@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Yz+vZtJJYdFmjE7JBdJUsUoUbiQ1lgpunpxE0b9WspY=; b=IPiSFEBirtWc+0T943LN4YYXo3ZbWM3NiN8unT7bOMWU/V+z36B2DkgeRSqWmCwn3Q rxO4VoThrGsV0wJOYU7ri28u3UnSH5SbAfooZ9ekQpUCFZMaQ197plwDkhuEKpJH78If DZOoVt7DHGRmpMh36rNhgRiz3Mtlbaw/yjnhXOhyr7umH+cQWXoNTBx5qAnLTMwdq/K9 sVPHUPlbkrRtlONWmLQ4J+1eIOd+mNmOPrVaKysqD6PXk/JpYkMe79XprqeyBcRbL4ex cVlzsUhCqzq7lctK315x6gTy+COI8weSz875yDJQlkKIUcdTvZgJU1194EsKRgG+SxrE IPrg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2F/DRF03hCsbnmh+4NKkX0iiiKuOE5lAGHbpDDT3h1qCo1TgSQ ADP3NNZBooo7sSq/AeinLLw85KVPLZG4qb7qifnBiQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJNTgIV28QJE95S3GNrEEG/CWUe1g0uoiGZS2MWAQoufKHl8WO4njCZ8/dm8yTxCGiuTxvnw8+SkajsLkHU2Cw=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:228b:: with SMTP id i133-v6mr9198740wmi.92.1528733173768; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+oaSDp3Pq9jBat8E_3BFpX8iqLaPxgjr_PJbkeeXFSOOr_QTQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAbpuypa=1mEsTZ94bc98ns+FSEPrkTPwgATKCc3AKAV+5zEfw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAbpuypa=1mEsTZ94bc98ns+FSEPrkTPwgATKCc3AKAV+5zEfw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Esteve Rothenberg <chesteve@dca.fee.unicamp.br>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:06:04 -0300
Message-ID: <CAEj5p9SWLnKSRu_fHJL=A4+KYCSfUqL+9yYMGMSJ3S+DFhZA5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com
Cc: x.shawn.lin@gmail.com, IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/5CTrLDb0z8IuMwPR3JZinSPp4mk>
Subject: Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/alto/>
List-Post: <mailto:alto@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:06:18 -0000
Nice work! In line with Jensen questions, I was going to suggest adding the RFC / draft info to the Implementation details, e.g. Network Map, Cost Map, Unified Property Map, Path Vector. Especially highlighting the proposed extensions would help to identify the need to move these extensions forward to become RFC, and/or eventually be merged, if / after we realize through a proper Table mapping proposed extensions to use case implementations and citations. Such a table could also incorporate the additional requirements suggested by Jensen and altogether contribute to a potential WG recharter. -ch Em seg, 11 de jun de 2018 às 03:32, Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com> escreveu: > > Hi Shawn, > > Thank you a lot! Also, thank Dawn and Danny. A survey on the current ALTO related works is very helpful. > > I believe your classification for the ALTO use cases is based on the role ALTO plays in the existing system. Do we have any summary of the requirements? All of them use the standard ALTO without any modification or extension? I believe such information is more useful and should be considered in the survey. Because we try to understand what are the essential additional requirements for newer scenarios. It will decide whether we need to recharter the WG. > > Best, > Jensen > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 1:21 PM Shawn Lin <x.shawn.lin@gmail.com> 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. >> >> Currently, we have a deck of slides and a skeleton of our draft. We had some wonderful discussions with @Richard and @Sabine! So here we would like to share the slides with the WG and get feedback from WG members. I believe it is a good way to summarize the current status and look into the next step :) >> >> The current slides include 6 ALTO implementations (from open source project, academic research, and company production) and 18 use cases (from IETF drafts/slides, papers, and white papers) in 5 categories like below: >> >> >> ALTO Use Cases >> >> | >> >> +--> Information Source >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Path Selection in MPTS-AR >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Locate Content in Mobile Edge Cache >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Virtualized Service Function Chain Placement >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Intelligent VM Placement >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Service Placement in IoT >> >> | >> >> +--> Ranking Server >> >> | | >> >> | +---> A Peer Ranking Service for P2P Streaming >> >> | | Information >> >> | +---> A Service to Select CDN Surrogate >> >> | | >> >> | +---> A Service to Select CDN Servers from >> >> | | Different SDN Domains >> >> | +---> A Service to Select downstream CDN >> >> | | >> >> | +---> A Service to Guide the Peer Connection >> >> | in Blockchain >> >> | >> >> +--> Network Abstraction >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Network Abstraction Provider in SDN >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Topology Abstraction for VPN Scale-out >> >> | | Decisions >> >> | +---> ALTO being Used to Solving n2 Problem >> >> | >> >> |--> Information Exchanger >> >> | | >> >> | +---> Network Behaviors Exchanger between >> >> | Providers >> >> | >> >> +--> Measure Results Interface >> >> | >> >> +---> An Interface to Query on the LMAP >> >> measure results >> >> >> >> We attach the slides below. You can also access the editable version in Google Slides: >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aXIZfUjQrSFhkVIUbvt2ouKWqLgGq4kbG-EBmSaZtKo/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >> Any comments or suggestions are welcomed and appreciated! >> >> Bests, >> Shawn Lin >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Shawn Lin
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Qiao Xiang
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Shawn Lin
- [alto] a survey of ALTO Shawn Lin
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Jensen Zhang
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Christian Esteve Rothenberg
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Qiao Xiang
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [alto] a survey of ALTO Dawn Chan