Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09.txt
Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com> Thu, 10 October 2019 03:00 UTC
Return-Path: <jingxuan.n.zhang@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 0A45D12006B for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 20:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 530PCTruN_67 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2f]) (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 6E2DD120046 for <alto@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com with SMTP id p13so2943305vso.0 for <alto@ietf.org>; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fHpZUhHq+go2u11vNNbx33I9gY93MMPRiiw6eWQVUQI=; b=VVeh7SznYN2sQsLNiVKxIdqhbapYnQtzKGKVYg7fmOmmQxPFCs2nmbxnuIyDYILmgV /gZcTIVqsIOwF0nHhCdU+EObv28MQbOvr4DsaKZNV8fYdOAoE4UGlmCbjp7owJowHefU 7xdo4mxcFsv7vD/QDaXhuJHkK0DurfoHRmGn4MCfMOJZA0k/IBYZ3JjXLLPMOA93Bq9V tcR6hymKYp6MtXS/GDbCWN2IOVbdhrjvj0iRZH153IK/HfJT0RhwI5I1W5F5aff7uZNH ERUbZPXrz65RreD7MXVMWwp7AkrXtktIIiK1Ey3Bs16FwjidU7dx73MFHUZNlbyGyrIk yobw==
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; bh=fHpZUhHq+go2u11vNNbx33I9gY93MMPRiiw6eWQVUQI=; b=RuAtD5ytmRG6TA0KQXnSEPjsyV+d3GADJMShJ2KBk83FeVoEXRGXIJy9455So01b+Z M1jG8YYsSFqqcbxCCevPeJb8BZz8phponoAcGHcq0+SRxhtIrorThrEmNB3ylmirpZex 50nNVgxeG17jyxHAaw28AQbms6yzimYEhVpTvYrdlBHOXZ+s2O1cXpLYaTLJ4pwgv5lb aVvMG45uUsjT0tAj9/p3Ki9gT7L/FA7QiRAcqPiStdcg0bNSzn2CKhDTQNVrOTljWpkc 4/BzcubxgVO/9wgOex2iT30JuCA2Nui3SMdFP3tRI8b89nE5sPzXvlHWLgCwqEc/JPCS g1pA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW8gThrem6OUqYq8IM/qfxCSrHZtNCqnFOD4ZG4Zoo5Y4JXUtgG E7AV7tO26mf3iPaqkcrFxFRgxTqpo0ow8xzDjT4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw9LpERY4sDyExImT+3/1yx1IOJLdZ4NS+PGznJVrqu2P3XKK2V0/QFFbOdRw3IFdHk3LUqKzFRXBuuCXu3vzQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:fa52:: with SMTP id j18mr3939398vsq.35.1570676395347; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <156760442278.22833.16544634733937720759@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAEDarXLD+eJVM4rQg94FmmnJhUwXCROdNzen34nuJcwSwb=ihw@mail.gmail.com> <PR1PR07MB5100C260E33E211D02A5AEBF95840@PR1PR07MB5100.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAEDarXLkZ30hA1m5Y9x7N8z5TcYEyh2r-FuXkfAsWhGV4Cm7EA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAbpuypFVJrQ2WrNPvjCBOrxM4-Ny6_jx3JSkXR789UMwpVX=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOELiNM=cHR0V_W2UAZZd2bvDjGe-VSSvrDd59R--_Ea4KQ8NA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAbpuyqf=rpoz7CEw3ehm9tkQRtJr04aLoVUihF-neeM8Frf1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOELiNN5Uewq6aG3-_xOBXS05=XfOakzk69B3Gp1iHzePM6Oww@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOELiNN5Uewq6aG3-_xOBXS05=XfOakzk69B3Gp1iHzePM6Oww@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 22:59:46 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAbpuyqvE_zqoGOhuczfMtcVTgcp8VdzozSipAZgnVg_S3=ccA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kai GAO <godrickk@gmail.com>
Cc: Danny Alex Lachos Perez <dlachosper@gmail.com>, IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009a122c0594859841"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/Pe9PCNWAVfBfWbQgXxKue9Eo9Gg>
Subject: Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09.txt
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 03:00:00 -0000
Hi Kai, Great! This structure looks better to clarify those concepts. I would like to support it. If nobody has another proposal against it, let's add this change in the next revision. I can send a new draft to you by this weekend so that you can take another pass before we upload the next revision. Thanks, Jensen On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:46 PM Kai GAO <godrickk@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jensen and all, > > Actually, I would suggest the following structure: > > - Basic Concepts > - Information Resource > - Entity > - Entity Property > - Entity Domain > - Property Map <==== Explain how property map works and the motivations > for exporting and aggregating entity domains > - Resource-Specific Entity Domain > - Aggregated Entity Domain > - Resource-Specify Entity Property > > The two top-level sections (basic concepts and property map) are similar > to Sec 2 (Terminology) and Sec 5 (Network Map) in RFC 7285. > > In the basic concepts section, we are describing what already exists even > without the property map service. > > In the property map section, we are "inventing" concepts that serve > certain practical purposes (e.g., provide indications of what > entities/properties can be queried, aggregate entities/properties). > > Having said that, it is OK with me that we keep the current structure or > only make some small changes if it requires too much work. > > Best, > Kai > > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 12:11 AM Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Kai, >> >> I reviewed the document again. I think you are proposing the following >> restructure, right? >> >> Entity -> Information Resource -> Entity Property (Resource-Specific >> Entity Property) -> Property Map -> Entity Domain (Resource-Specific Entity >> Domain, Aggregated Entity Domain) >> >> Intuitively it looks good. But when you look into the motivation of >> Resource-Specific Entity Property, you will find it is weak here. Because >> only when you use the Aggregated Entity Domain representation in a Property >> Map, you will need this concept. Otherwise, it is useless. That is why I >> put it behind those two concepts. But maybe your intuition is right. The " >> Resource-Specific Entity Property" should be out of "Entity Domain". How >> about we move 2.5.4 to 2.6? How do you think? >> >> Best, >> Jensen >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 9:02 AM Kai GAO <godrickk@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Jensen and all, >>> >>> I'm looking at the -10 version and find it quite odd to have 2.5.4 >>> Resource-specific Entity Property as a subsection of 2.4 Entity Domain. >>> >>> My suggestion is to move 2.5.4 to 2.2 instead. Another potential >>> improvement is to move 2.4 Information Resource before 2.2. >>> >>> Best, >>> Kai >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 5:28 AM Jensen Zhang <jingxuan.n.zhang@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Danny, >>>> >>>> Thanks for your review and comments. Sabine and I are working on the >>>> next revision. We will address all the issues in the next revision. >>>> >>>> And for your additional comment, actually, the "ip-pid-property-map" >>>> resource in IRD is an example of Aggregated Entity Domain. Sec 9.7 should >>>> illustrate it. But you are right, the current example in Sec 9.7 does not >>>> show the benefit of Aggregated Entity Domain. I will also revise this >>>> example in the next revision. >>>> >>>> Looking forward to your further comments. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Jensen >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:50 AM Danny Alex Lachos Perez < >>>> dlachosper@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Sabine, >>>>> >>>>> I have a quick additional comment: >>>>> >>>>> I believe that an example (sec. 9) of Aggregated Entity Domain is >>>>> missing. >>>>> Perhaps you could re-use (or extend) the IRD example [0] and try to >>>>> add a couple of sentences to indicate equivalent entity property mappings >>>>> (see slide 17, 18 in [1]). >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Danny Lachos >>>>> [0] >>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09#page-28 >>>>> [1] >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-alto-unified-properties-for-the-alto-protocol-02.pdf >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 10:42 AM Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - >>>>> FR/Paris-Saclay) <sabine.randriamasy@nokia-bell-labs.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Danny, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Many thanks for your review. I saw your last comment is in Section >>>>>> 9.7. >>>>>> >>>>>> Should we consider that until section 9.7 your review is complete or >>>>>> will you have more questions? >>>>>> >>>>>> We look forward to your other comments, >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Sabine >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* alto <alto-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Danny Alex >>>>>> Lachos Perez >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 8:28 PM >>>>>> *To:* IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org> >>>>>> *Cc:* i-d-announce@ietf.org >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [alto] I-D Action: >>>>>> draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09...txt >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear authors, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I started to read the “*Unified Properties for the ALTO Protocol*” draft >>>>>> (-09). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please, see my first comments in the attached file (search for >>>>>> '[DANNY]'). >>>>>> >>>>>> Many of them are suggestions about clarity and format issues . >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I will continue the review and send additional comments in a short >>>>>> time. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Danny Lachos >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:41 AM <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 : Unified Properties for the ALTO Protocol >>>>>> Authors : Wendy Roome >>>>>> Sabine Randriamasy >>>>>> Y. Richard Yang >>>>>> Jingxuan Jensen Zhang >>>>>> Kai Gao >>>>>> Filename : draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09.txt >>>>>> Pages : 43 >>>>>> Date : 2019-09-04 >>>>>> >>>>>> Abstract: >>>>>> This document extends the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization >>>>>> (ALTO) Protocol [RFC7285] by generalizing the concept of "endpoint >>>>>> properties" to generic types of entities, and by presenting those >>>>>> properties as maps, similar to the network and cost maps in >>>>>> [RFC7285]. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new/ >>>>>> >>>>>> There are also htmlized versions available at: >>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09 >>>>>> >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09 >>>>>> >>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-09 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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/ >>>>>> <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 >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> alto mailing list >>>> alto@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >>>> >>>
- [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-… internet-drafts
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Danny Alex Lachos Perez
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Danny Alex Lachos Perez
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Silberschatz, Avi
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Jensen Zhang
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Kai GAO
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Jensen Zhang
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Kai GAO
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Jensen Zhang
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Kai GAO
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)
- Re: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-unified-pr… Kai GAO