Re: [alto] Status update //RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05.txt

Danny Alex Lachos Perez <dlachosp@dca.fee.unicamp.br> Tue, 23 October 2018 02:04 UTC

Return-Path: <dlachosp@dca.fee.unicamp.br>
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 EBAB6130DDA for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yGM86PLKTqNH for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vm2-dca.fee.unicamp.br (vm2-dca.fee.unicamp.br [143.106.148.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824F5130DDC for <alto@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-f179.google.com (mail-pg1-f179.google.com [209.85.215.179]) (Authenticated sender: dlachosp) by vm2-dca.fee.unicamp.br (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56A0C887B for <alto@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 00:04:35 -0200 (BRST)
Received: by mail-pg1-f179.google.com with SMTP id g12-v6so19898223pgs.1 for <alto@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoj1d4qe1LZlMtF0Y8A4v5sGsVAVt2n0m/UG/DS9mRw++QAh0FhE DsOWNECcPUXCi0zYKwJCCHzfPQuqNCERMO7IkMM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV61XRSId8WjSQG6oeZdWLAFxH8CSapwQHXXHb8O3xoveN+2Gq580DRlxD8q/YsLFSjTW4mBcbhg85Vd8PvqlW0Y=
X-Received: by 2002:a62:9702:: with SMTP id n2-v6mr165032pfe.222.1540260272610; Mon, 22 Oct 2018 19:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <154017073595.10657.7642714774728414581@ietfa.amsl.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9B0B8CBE@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9B0B8CBE@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
From: Danny Alex Lachos Perez <dlachosp@dca.fee.unicamp.br>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 23:04:20 -0300
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAEDarXKNWSGyU3LXQZjD++rdXqX+tCMhV7=zYpoeQpKu7X4O3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEDarXKNWSGyU3LXQZjD++rdXqX+tCMhV7=zYpoeQpKu7X4O3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: bill.wu@huawei.com
Cc: IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="00000000000069a1840578dbcab9"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/a_4Mt7aUS4-nLRzYKEGgnQv0pD8>
Subject: Re: [alto] Status update //RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05.txt
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: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 02:04:45 -0000

Hello, Qin and all the authors.

I have performed a review of this draft (-05).

My comments are in the attached file (marked with [DANNY]). Most of them
are about format issues, consistency, and clarity. However, I have a
technical comment:

Regarding hop count cost metric (section 6), the metric name is very
generic. Considering the "metric description", you basically refer to
router hops. What about other types of hop count, for example, AS-hops?.
Based on your description, I think that this metric could have a more
specific name ("router hop count", for giving an example)

PLUS:
Each cost metric (OWDelay, RTT, PDV, Hop Count, Packet Loss, and
Throughput) is considered a section. However, I think you can consider them
as subsections of a section, similar to how you did with Traffic
Engineering Performance Cost Metrics (section 9).

Best regards,

Danny Lachos


On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 10:15 PM Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>; wrote:

> Hi,
> The main changes in v-(05) are to remove duplicated text for PDV cost
> metric and add throughput cost metric to align with cost calendar draft.
> The diff is:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05
>
> -Qin
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: alto [mailto:alto-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 internet-drafts@ietf.org
> 发送时间: 2018年10月22日 9:12
> 收件人: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> 抄送: alto@ietf.org
> 主题: [alto] I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05.txt
>
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization WG
> of the IETF.
>
>         Title           : ALTO Performance Cost Metrics
>         Authors         : Qin Wu
>                           Y. Richard Yang
>                           Young Lee
>                           Dhruv Dhody
>                           Sabine Randriamasy
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05.txt
>         Pages           : 26
>         Date            : 2018-10-21
>
> Abstract:
>    Cost Metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic
>    Optimization (ALTO).  It is used in both the Cost Map Service and the
>    Endpoint Cost Service.
>
>    Different applications may benefit from different Cost Metrics.  For
>    example, a Resource Consumer may prefer Resource Providers that offer
>    a low delay delivery to the Resource Consumer.  However the base ALTO
>    protocol [ALTO] has documented only one single cost metric, i.e., the
>    generic "routingcost" metric (Sec. 14.2 of ALTO base specification
>    [ALTO]).
>
>    This document, proposes a set of Cost Metrics, derived and aggregated
>    from routing protocols with different granularity and scope, such as
>    BGP-LS,OSPF-TE and ISIS-TE, or from end-to-end traffic management
>    tools.  It currently documents Network Performance Cost Metrics
>    reporting on network delay, jitter, packet loss, hop count, and
>    bandwidth.  These metrics may be exposed by an ALTO Server to allow
>    applications to determine "where" to connect based on network
>    performance criteria.  Additional Cost Metrics involving ISP specific
>    considerations or other network technologies may be documented in
>    further versions of this draft.
>
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics/
>
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> tools.ietf.org.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>