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

<grant.watson@bt.com> Tue, 03 May 2011 08:02 UTC

Return-Path: <grant.watson@bt.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 0235DE07A7 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2011 01:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.446
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, J_CHICKENPOX_61=0.6]
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 nlO3khrGlRFq for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2011 01:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpe1.intersmtp.com (smtp61.intersmtp.COM [62.239.224.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3114AE07A2 for <alto@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 May 2011 01:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EVMHT66-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net (10.36.3.103) by RDW083A005ED61.smtp-e1.hygiene.service (10.187.98.10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.106.1; Tue, 3 May 2011 09:01:58 +0100
Received: from EMV64-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net ([169.254.2.5]) by EVMHT66-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net ([10.36.3.103]) with mapi; Tue, 3 May 2011 09:02:18 +0100
From: grant.watson@bt.com
To: rich@velvetsea.net, sprevidi@cisco.com
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 09:02:20 +0100
Thread-Topic: [alto] New draft on use cases for ALTO & CDNs
Thread-Index: AcwHS450l/+x9ugrSsqbAKrAixgzawCHNiuA
Message-ID: <1F3DE948AD28CB4D905D51039D081AF62637E4D13F@EMV64-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net>
References: <C9DED2F8.27A3F%jmedved@juniper.net> <2486FF57-F49D-4B62-8279-800CC0E3DB78@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <7EE205E8-9652-4E5E-B3D3-10994282019A@cisco.com> <BANLkTimH+QB=Excv0ab4ntgXeUV01WYKiw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimH+QB=Excv0ab4ntgXeUV01WYKiw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 03 May 2011 08:09:05 -0700
Cc: nabil.n.bitar@verizon.com, 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: Tue, 03 May 2011 08:02:20 -0000

ditto

-----Original Message-----
From: richard.alimi@gmail.com [mailto:richard.alimi@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Richard Alimi
Sent: 30 April 2011 16:30
To: stefano previdi
Cc: Jan Medved; Ben Niven-Jenkins; Watson,G,Grant,DMK5 R; Nabil N Bitar; alto@ietf.org; YR Yang; Reinaldo Penno
Subject: Re: [alto] New draft on use cases for ALTO & CDNs

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:43 AM, stefano previdi <sprevidi@cisco.com> wrote:
> Ben, Jan, Nabil, Grant, Richard, Richard, Reinaldo,
>
> thinking more about it, I believe the requirements will have to be put
> into a separate draft, for clarity.
>
> I agree with Jan about the duplication of text between alto-cdn and your
> draft so we should merge. Therefore, I'd propose the following plan:
>
> Co-authors of alto-cdn and jenkins draft meet and propose a unified
> use cases description draft. At this stage most of the work will be just
> editorial (cut/paste) as we clearly agree on the content (i.e.: use case
> description).
>
> It would be good to come reasonably soon with a proposal to the WG.
>
> How does it sound ?

This sounds great to me.

Rich

>
> s.
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2011, at 8:27 PM, Ben Niven-Jenkins wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>
>