Re: [alto] unified-props, cellular addresses and path-vector

Dawn Chan <> Tue, 27 February 2018 08:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B8812783A for <>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:25:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.124
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.124 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XIOgs-x7FD8B for <>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:25:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BFE61276AF for <>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:25:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=fztc3JJakjHjcjR0NZkhHd3azkZRjOPGEEP82mkVWdA=; b=foNxFW5OTdvA6PRPtVAb0uexKFY4VN8qSWbWBD5XoNR1GTKsG0slY8mkMkBW08J9aQoXdx7ZYo8NLKrvuVhoPek654bB2/tpo1fVeNn+WfldqaJDHaY5wmbDlnzROJKJ1cErKIFlHGzWNDjDxP1zRdEhEWf9S3P7W7afFsoSKNC+SYBdYQB4cAQx7k+J/+gXMwEC7i+A3C8gPODG4lVcr+GdHS12gCAx4F44iA2aZeufZ3P3eTO5Xj8Kgb3jAXmwuSQ8Nw7vOQ1J4Up8klqdutj2ur81JrJkUVdNQfy8akLzURgsl5Cxev9V+NG8GSsqUBuf1BwCir5rpunAnaQVGw==
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.506.19; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:25:11 +0000
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.20.527.18 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:25:11 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.20.0527.021; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:25:10 +0000
From: Dawn Chan <>
To: "Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)" <>, "Y. Richard Yang" <>, Wendy Roome <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: unified-props, cellular addresses and path-vector
Thread-Index: AQHTrBG9Ct5bX1yzY0CbkuooR1WyWaOxh8cAgADUDQCABIcBAIABDegA
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:25:10 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:2B6076AF0F0CC46EC379894FD2F03F9FEE4951ABF3FF975DB7E1D2A4F75660CC; UpperCasedChecksum:8A01F3F998BC2B597DC5B16F8F50F09DF813210F2E2C0DDE353D8B75221C3325; SizeAsReceived:7458; Count:47
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [hKkEk+H0hWaOUuyZgGT2YAYFFVxSi2I80iwfycAHFUg=]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1NAM02HT121; 6:7HbZuVRASg6A+5PlhUoSLAYNAXKmPNCOLdPQgMdiScwj+IDeKS83c1SVhoQ9q/+r73tNxHeVTpxuiFwYoqHhSYzROG3i2cro0krVrkA4NanYPkGYDyJasITXxudu89dxZKr4if9Xw8ZHxa7qW2yrp0BER92Cnzhg9fHxZVsrfO4HbRH0xC6fmKnNCHt4DWeENYWBWab3FZkjTAGhEOGrJyW/O7TTYKp7cM69AXXQyHdmHp11JTy8aQc8yJhQ8rSTCg1DaLm3I7x2737znJT6jQRH15W18+iFPTRyo80dytNQ63Do5VRYVQvWVmuHdeL04JqHUyLhYB7nBb7EFM2CB4Nub8yhFCsJyNLeCNwKGso=; 5:bWqwDt901nour0WgYv9PzHdBWdX6am7fiknDuV2osXMSF4armhCA+lOCoZZlyO0ho3a/TlK6Y1IBb1ODrkRJGrfOXT3bYiMlbOWcX9pNzfhWDOo0D91tjAGr39ORUUKh27UNqYhEI89NLvGKEhwsU/pN4OvwglxfsHfKTDzwYys=; 24:BN5vwQLOcWHCX8w842Q1QT7iHqBu15TTVZ43iqqvM5620eqEuOtzomn/HRQ6MnJP35+54VsaFyZ6e3u4uq4pH5ArXNlN+s0/a626IBwLpxc=; 7:3jqKmXx/Sn+AVU8DIdXrcwaNDrmaeA9VQnTiF6mYPvW0tnn+hkLGqg4E3UXpYqHY9jreRqzaRBscSzc2XDrJAoPVmXZp1tPKEDH9QPXv0Bd61wgU4X+CnrvyZ+xI75hjM/dOGWnps5v3aXY9FbaqdwLgW4dFMY2LEg+EviRC1ll+BP5/I0JIT9E3Wboid6oo0Zf6BqK1m3uOZmSck4Pg2htmmbxgI5tNuYa52TbgXjV7H9TC8z6nVp1/g2n6R2aK
x-incomingheadercount: 47
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:(17574466456847); BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(201702061078)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322404)(1601125374)(1603101448)(1701031045); SRVR:SN1NAM02HT121;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN1NAM02HT121:
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 856f890f-232e-4fcd-df40-08d57dbb9d54
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:SN1NAM02HT121; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN1NAM02HT121;
x-forefront-prvs: 05961EBAFC
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1NAM02HT121;; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BN3PR02MB1208138DACA86AFDC47CBAFAB5C00BN3PR02MB1208namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 856f890f-232e-4fcd-df40-08d57dbb9d54
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Feb 2018 08:25:10.6453 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1NAM02HT121
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [alto] unified-props, cellular addresses and path-vector
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:25:15 -0000

Hi Sabine,

Actually I do find the proposal of the entity domain “ecgi”, but I do not see the detailed definition in Actually, since the concept of unified property is clean enough. And I still remember that Shawn proposed to add a new domain country code for CDNI. So the suggestion is to remove the whole  "Section 3.4 ANE Domain" in the unified property map, so that it will be defined in the path vector draft itself. This way, other entity domains can be registered in their own related document?


On 27 Feb 2018, at 12:18 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 . 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?


From:<> [] On Behalf Of Y. Richard Yang
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 8:11 PM
To: Dawn Chan <<>>
Cc: Gurbani, Vijay (Nokia - US/Naperville) <<>>; Wendy Roome <<>>; Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) <<>>;<>
Subject: Re: unified-props, cellular addresses and path-vector

It looks that the suggestion by Dawn is reasonable.

I am taking a look again at the possibility of integrating cellular into UP quickly. An alternative is that we get it done shortly, in the next couple days.

If this is the approach, Sabine is a great person to work together. Make sense, Sabine?


On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Dawn Chan <<>> wrote:
Hi all,

Draft Unified Property is quite stable at the moment, and the major problem left is whether the cellular address needs to be appended. Actually, since the Unified Property maintains an entity domain registry to achieve extensibility so that we suggest the new entity domain cellular address to be registered in the itself. This way, the draft Unified Property can proceed first.

Besides, path-vector and unified property depend on each other so they should move as a bundle.

Do you think this is a feasible solution?

On 23 Feb 2018, at 3:16 AM, Vijay K. Gurbani <<>> wrote:

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.


Thank you,

- vijay
Vijay K. Gurbani /<>
Network Data Science, Nokia Networks

| Y. Richard Yang <<>>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
|        |