Re: [alto] Last Call: <draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-02.txt> (A Cost Mode Registry for the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol) to Proposed Standard

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Sun, 08 May 2022 03:53 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
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 77D5EC159489; Sat, 7 May 2022 20:53:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mit.edu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I_nnFXdm0UUK; Sat, 7 May 2022 20:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA354C14F72C; Sat, 7 May 2022 20:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu (c-73-169-244-254.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [73.169.244.254]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 2483rQCX000737 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 7 May 2022 23:53:33 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mit.edu; s=outgoing; t=1651982013; bh=NHXxZWanHITntdo2fEsOWGfCspk4ty6sJ88Z1ld19tk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=fe9dUmhr0yYUBfuVDBQ2QzSsYrTvnnHn64+BwS2vyPgfy8aisu82WjOijqLJ6WQNj K8XBo6S+lh2BeJvflwTzvTy4udL99gt0gatq0o9ZFjC/t/Ldk8kB2z3Ci8D7KCSkUM ILzICEpsYEODj2Jt8ydOz3prQm1+OW4x/OeZnk+iGI2Nr0Zw0O3G8803jnTgk35YA3 IX2oIrutZ+p5y7plF1EM+v7TcVVY+UlBML5XpidI8WwXKxf7CZ3zqWhZxYlQpteq0a HDPSfRLGYvZXTuCg3Hkcnt+82OmiP0I6G3eFW370TRrqDWehQ5WRItdVtY+lGl2+8v p0OHZxYTpgAew==
Date: Sat, 07 May 2022 20:53:26 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: last-call@ietf.org
Cc: alto@ietf.org, draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20220508035326.GU49097@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <165124064634.6892.13069991742221916024@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <165124064634.6892.13069991742221916024@ietfa.amsl.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/ZPb-RE78BcaluA6Z1RJqCWGJ-ys>
Subject: Re: [alto] Last Call: <draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-02.txt> (A Cost Mode Registry for the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Sun, 08 May 2022 03:53:41 -0000

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 06:57:26AM -0700, The IESG wrote:
> 
> The IESG has received a request from the Application-Layer Traffic
> Optimization WG (alto) to consider the following document: - 'A Cost Mode
> Registry for the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization
>    (ALTO) Protocol'
>   <draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-02.txt> as Proposed Standard
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2022-05-13. Exceptionally, comments may
> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
> of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

This document is meeting a real need by fleshing out an extension point for
ALTO that was previously over-constrained and not actually usable for
extensions.

The security considerations section currently just defers to the core ALTO
procotol spec, RFC 7285.  This seems appropriate, as this document is just
opening up the extension point, but we might also consider providing
specific encouragement for authors of new cost modes to document
considerations unique to that cost mode.  Hopefully such documents would
already provide comprehensive security considerations, though, so it does
not seem strictly needed for us to say anything here.

-Ben