Re: [alto] ALTO minutes from IETF99 meeting

[Jan Seedorf <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

since there were no comments, I have just uploaded the minutes to the 
datatracker.

  - Jan


On 07.08.17 13:00, Jan Seedorf wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> please find attached the minutes from the ALTO session at IETF99. 
> Please let Vijay and myself have any comments/corrections within a week.
>
> Many thanks to our note-takers Lyle and Sabine!
>
>  - Jan
>
> ***
>
> IETF 99, July 16-21, 2017. Prague, Czech Republic
> ALTO WG Meeting, Thu Jul 20, 2017 1330-1530 Karlin III
> Notetakers: Lyle Bertz, Sabine Randriamasy
>
> 1330 - 1340 10' Agenda bash and WG update (Chairs)
> - Focus is to finish chartered items so the agenda is based on this 
> (charter & milestone items are first; new topics are best effort)
> - Goal is to finish milestones @ IETF-101
> - Richard : Finish means?
>         Jan: If something is close to WGLC that should work; in 
> principal finish means WGLC
> - Last meeting: adopted path vector, unified prop, cdni
> - milestones: Multi-Cost OK
> - ALTO performance metrics needs more work (review)
> - Props, Path Vector & CDNI need more work
> - Other business?
>         - Richard:
>         - What is the timing for the next wg meeting if not meeting @ 
> IETF 100?
>         - Jan: Timeframe is around Singapore
>         - AD: Clarification that meeting should not be at the time of 
> IETF but closer to IETF 100
>         - Workshop is mid August in Los Angeles with LHC and other teams.
>
> 1340 - 1355 15' ALTO cost calendar, S. Randriamasy
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-02
> - Reviewed all updates
> - Discussion Items
>         - - RY several time granularities. Client can aggregate itself ?
>                 => SR: yes the server should provide finest granularity.
>                 (TODO: the client SHOULD interpret the time interval 
> size as the finest available from server).
>         - Richard / Sabine agree to move ahead on granularity response
>         - Sabine - The ALTO server provides the finest grain value for 
> the time-interval
> - Jan: After issues herein are closed does the team agree this should 
> WGLC (hum)
>         - Result: No hums against moving it to WGLC once issues/open 
> items are resolved
>         - Please make the resolutions on this on the list
>
> 1355 - 1410 15' ALTO cost context, S. Randriamasy
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-randriamasy-alto-cost-context-02
> - Reviewed Concepts and Updates per WG feedback
> - Questions:
>         - Dawn - One suggestion is to make suggestion to specifiy the 
> order of the response (has this been considered)?
>         - Different options were discussed. Will continute to mailing 
> list.
>         - Would adding context to the cost add extra privacy concerns?
>         - This should be discussed in the document.
>         - Richard - point out that this is part of a more generalized 
> issue of a type system in ALTO
>         - Type system was urged to be a future dicussion on this matter
>         - Richard: we need reconsider cost type design (type, mode, 
> where fit context?)
>         - Seb: IANA considerations ?
>             ==> SR yes we need look at other IETF Work and consider 
> IANA registration.
> - For now, chair ask is to move ahead but since it is not part of the 
> milestones we will lead
>
> 1410 - 1425 15' ALTO incremental updates, R. Yang
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse/
> - Overview of changes
> - Does WG believe this is ready for WGLC after items are completed (hum)?
>         - No reaction either way
> - Sabine - Main task is complete but needs work to specify who is 
> sending a SSE and for what reason
>         - Suggestion is that we can make the Client/Server roles more 
> explicit
> - JS: JSON patch important for CDNI. WG seems now more active on that 
> one.
> - SR: needs clarification on who requires what for what
> - RY: yes we will need to clarify that
>
>
> 1425 - 1435 10' CDN Footprints and Capability Advertisements, R. Yang
> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-seedorf-cdni-request-routing-alto-10.txt
>        (This is a WG draft; needs to be resubmitted with the correct 
> name.)
> - Jan presenting
> - Advanced design is being looked at but the focus is the basic design
> - Richard - Discussion wrt the envelope name
>         - outcome is to use somehting like "cdni/fci"
>
> 1435 - 1450 15' ALTO path vector, D. Chan
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector/
> - Discussed 3 remaining design issues
> - Point raised about why this technique for MIME is not used in SSE
> - Privacy implications exist for cross product query but PID flows don't
>
> 1450 - 1455 05' Extensible property maps for ALTO, D. Chan
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-roome-alto-unified-props-new/
>        (This is a WG draft; needs to be resubmitted with the correct 
> name.)
> -  With no time left, discussion will be deferred to the list
> -  Jan: Please don't add use cases every 2 months or it will never get 
> done
>
> 1455 - 1500 05' ALTO cross-domain server discovery, S. Kiesel
>        https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-xdom-disc/
> -  Richard - Document is useful but if we can carve out the principal 
> it would be helpful, can you come up with more clear principles?
> -  JS: seb said will look at it.
> -  Will review Richard's comments and move to WGLC
>
> 1500 - 1509 09' ALTO cellular address extension, S. Randriamasy
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-randriamasy-alto-cellular-adresses-00
> -  Proposed based on prior work
> -  Lyle - Ignore leading 0 concern as they are about LR(0) parsing and 
> over the wire frame alignment
>
> 1509 - 1518 09' ALTO extension: Flow-based cost query, J. Zhang
>        https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gao-alto-fcs/
> -  No time for discussion.  All comments/discussions pushed to the 
> mailing list.
>
> 1518 - 1527 09' Resource Orchestration for Multi-Domain Data 
> Analytics, Q. Xi
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xiang-alto-exascale-network-optimization/
>        (Possible remote presentation)
> -  No time for discussion.  All comments/discussions pushed to the 
> mailing list.
>
> 1527 - 1530 03' Wrap up / Other business
> -  Next virtual interim meeting will be posted on the mailing list
>
>
> AO = ALTO
> AOS = ALTO Server
> AOC = ALTO Client
>
> ***
>
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto