IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [alto] Comments to "draft-ietf-alto-problem-statement-01"

Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Wed, 03 June 2009 01:40 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.com>
X-Original-To: alto@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78163A6D77 for <alto@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 18:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c3EIfhTSfdVa for <alto@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 18:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gs19.inmotionhosting.com (gs19.inmotionhosting.com [205.134.252.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 078B23A6A92 for <alto@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 18:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [12.46.252.162] (helo=[172.17.136.184]) by gs19.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1MBfSM-00050U-75; Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:39:55 -0700
Message-Id: <46B22506-C721-4448-8460-01F39A4E9D96@standardstrack.com>
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
To: Linda Dunbar <ldunbar@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <002301c9e393$8d988350$5c0c7c0a@china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-332--601976426"; micalg="sha1"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:39:55 -0400
References: <C6458CC8.2C43E%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <006601c9e2d2$29cefb90$5c0c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <9FE69972-6D13-4BC0-92D5-FBE17FBF18C4@standardstrack.com> <002301c9e393$8d988350$5c0c7c0a@china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gs19.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: alto <alto@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [alto] Comments to "draft-ietf-alto-problem-statement-01"
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 01:40:05 -0000

Inline.

On Jun 2, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Thank you very much for the explanation. Since I haven't  
> participated in the ALTO discussion until recently, I am not aware  
> that working group has already reached consensus on the document.  
> Seeing the document is only at its Version 1, I thought the document  
> is still at its early stage and open for input.
>
More important: thanks for the review!  The document went through  
quite a few revisions at the draft-marocco stage.
> I will take you suggestion on trying to draw a "better picture" and  
> submit to the working group for review.  If no better picture can be  
> agreed by the working group, I would like to take your offer on  
> putting the following words into the document:
>
>
> Figure 1 is only representative of the situation and, in particular,  
> does NOT enumerate any particular or favored implementation strategy
>
Both (either a new figure or the disclaimer text) works for me.  Any  
one else in the group have thoughts?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email