IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [alto] New draft on use cases for ALTO & CDNs

Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Thu, 28 April 2011 18:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
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 8E9F3E069A for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.927
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.927 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.328, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gatdGwEH2hTc for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72F7DE0669 for <alto@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from host1.cachelogic.com ([212.44.43.80] helo=dhcp-108-devlan.cachelogic.com) by mail5.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>) id 1QFVwU-00033H-4Z; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:27:58 +0100
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <C9DED2F8.27A3F%jmedved@juniper.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:27:55 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2486FF57-F49D-4B62-8279-800CC0E3DB78@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
References: <C9DED2F8.27A3F%jmedved@juniper.net>
To: Jan Medved <jmedved@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544
X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912
Cc: Grant Watson <grant.watson@bt.com>, Nabil N Bitar <nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com>, "alto@ietf.org" <alto@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [alto] New draft on use cases for ALTO & CDNs
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:28:00 -0000

Jan, Stefano, Colleagues,

On 28 Apr 2011, at 16:30, Jan Medved wrote:
> On 4/28/11 2:58 AM, "stefano previdi" <sprevidi@cisco.com> wrote:
>> splitting the current alto-cdn document makes sense to me and we
>> need to define:
>> a. use cases
>> b. requirements
>> c. proposed solutions
> 
> This seems to be most logical split.
> 

Agreed.

>> 
>> your draft addresses the use cases and you may want to merge the
>> use cases sections we currently have in the alto-cdn draft so to
>> focus that one only on the proposed solution(s).
> 
> The first two uses cases in draft-jenkins-cdn-use-cases are described in
> draft-penno-alto-cdn. Agreed that the text from draft-penno-alto-cdn
> should be merged into the appropriate sections of
> draft-jenkins-cdn-use-cases.

I'm OK with that. When I read draft-penno-alto-cdn I found it hard to extract text that is pure use case though but if you could provide text or pointers to sections I'm happy to start discussing how we could merge the use case text in draft-penno-alto-cdn with that in draft-jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases.

>> The question is about requirements: do we want to include them
>> in one of the two drafts or into a separate document ?

My opinion is that the requirements should be documented separately to the solutions. I don't currently have a strong opinion about whether they should be documented in draft-jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases or a separate draft. 

Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email