[alto] WG draft status, please respond

Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com> Mon, 01 October 2018 16:16 UTC

Return-Path: <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728D5130E05 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 09:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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_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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F6N7NZ71SCB9 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 09:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x32d.google.com (mail-ot1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32d]) (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 7EC21130DFE for <alto@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Oct 2018 09:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id c20-v6so7105690otl.6 for <alto@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 09:16:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Kxl0jk9NiN2sJzO4X6d1OQduA2aMFarYFwTJANcDzig=; b=dgmpzPaYmXzN/Q9t6RwC0KLqZv6K/8HkvWBYaxeMJ7gKgU8iq3pQD/StZ7WrYrSlUL FNe2FRVyCoca1naTGHKXzl/lTulXO5XzSM9TGHJOZFdcbKPv5iN14R8Fl8sg5S6hfbu6 YoEWYgctTwQjxZmyH5mqBzzE27HdgozFooGL6HkNDtonBoLuYhFryjPOriyCP39N4uSg CCrem8g/oVsMlewTOMrvH4iB2e4nnHRGlj+gLW1pZZccCgylRBRT/yeWoOuQTxDed61g qdQ5UqBWUinKvA+iniwyaMR6aYk362Gmx79HHS5RgJN4jD5ZiJtKkYUd5+wn10fSLAik Afmw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Kxl0jk9NiN2sJzO4X6d1OQduA2aMFarYFwTJANcDzig=; b=GG1dJWOfh7RkoNLblSwrMrirw3O1O/bGsu26JB8+LUYVBjwO2i1BCyovkHsmIMpuF4 T+EpIU17ZoXrQflIL7F120ldoSO19MroYVUChK9uQoD3QWBpKJhB5Rcj5NSj+jXRH9X7 2yfDLi4Arw7oC8uv5K3Km/PZABORFterSPig5CgCwSYCuvdvmDLBFHkoICMcIxvKwR1T LIMgjbv5lfpGm3WRlK2jkqZ4G/csnmgY1zkYDD4G/ooZutfoI1O3159OfBh0BmbhmcHy SqHdiobbaxVgzP+6GIRzyyuhydeKIsyrnJZDncsIZV5yfAm+eyabNonuUS06kTSD2wb6 e8bg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohRoBURwJiRhtA96M6VRvLSMppv3MvpSXxfbZcAJNkyBOyqJvL7 zhz6hkK4lvWva+NcybT2x3p+HC1ZRy2+FqUlVAdaEwRO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV63uwTW25S5C6Wj9aQSuvqM1cm6l0W69fHKZL3Gs3cq/mcteB1PbRWj8UMOLYy2MlQhiRVEMlADskhsaCMSBe54=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3c17:: with SMTP id q23-v6mr6558051otc.221.1538410605489; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 09:16:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2018 11:16:34 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMMTW_LscuTNSQ5v7L-yWYeAYz5TY7+F2qv374hAaBK5DHrLFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: alto@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a8b20005772d21b7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/XGkn7h8veRUAmbzzY99Kht1NnU8>
Subject: [alto] WG draft status, please respond
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: Mon, 01 Oct 2018 16:16:49 -0000

Folks: This is the status of the WG documents as best as we are able to
piece it together.  Unfortunately, there has not been much progress since
IETF 102 in Montreal.  We really need to make progress on these documents.

Please see the status of the documents below and appraise the list of
current state of the work so Jan and I can start moving the more mature
pieces of work ahead.

- cost-calendar: AD reviewed the document (-07).  Authors modified document
 (-08) to address AD review on Sep-21-2018.  Token is with Mirja.

- xdom-disc: Expired Sep-6-2018.  Jan had prepared a proto writeup for this
 draft.  The authors are to release -03 for this draft so it can move ahead.
 @Authors, can you please update the list with the status of this draft?

 - incr-update-sse: Dawn indicates [1] that there have been substantial
 to the draft and an indepth review from an expert will be needed.  Jan and
 I will appreciate if someone from the list who has substantive ALTO
 can review the document as an expert.  Please let us know.

- performance-metrics: No change since IETF 102.  @Authors: can you please
 update the list with the status of this draft?

- unified-props: Jensen has posted a discussion on Sep-26-2018 that needs
 WG list attention, please see [2].  We need to close open issues here for
 this draft to move ahead.  Please engage Jensen with his queries in [2].

- cdni-request-routing: There has been no movement on this since IETF 102.
 It does not appear that the work is ready to be WGLC'd.  @Authors, can
 you please update the list with the status of this draft?

- path-vector: This appears to be progressing in the WG.  There has been
 discussion on this on the list.

[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03807.html
[2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg03808.html