Re: [alto] Work related to ALTO at IETF82

"Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@bell-labs.com> Tue, 15 November 2011 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <vkg@bell-labs.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 D127321F8B24 for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:14:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.565
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QTL6A7LX2JFv for <alto@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:14:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6717921F8B23 for <alto@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:14:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usnavsmail1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.9]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id pAFGEYcW021554 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:14:34 -0600 (CST)
Received: from umail.lucent.com (umail-ce2.ndc.lucent.com [135.3.40.63]) by usnavsmail1.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id pAFGEXuf015630 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:14:33 -0600
Received: from shoonya.ih.lucent.com (shoonya.ih.lucent.com [135.185.238.235]) by umail.lucent.com (8.13.8/TPES) with ESMTP id pAFGEWTG020779; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:14:33 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <4EC290A7.2060105@bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:17:43 -0600
From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@bell-labs.com>
Organization: Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Richard Alimi <rich@velvetsea.net>
References: <4EBD379A.7050506@telecomitalia.it> <4EBF30F8.8010209@googlemail.com> <CA+cvDaZ_Vfcy4ZQzhGruUvSznueYm1_33yhAhrZ5mdeFs3oMaw@mail.gmail.com> <4EC12CC6.4030608@bell-labs.com> <CA+cvDaZ7k6qHEN0421vWV1aFtP3hVugX64NNPcN0W8ugdFeHXA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+cvDaZ7k6qHEN0421vWV1aFtP3hVugX64NNPcN0W8ugdFeHXA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.9
Cc: alto@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [alto] Work related to ALTO at IETF82
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, 15 Nov 2011 16:14:42 -0000

On 11/14/2011 07:34 PM, Richard Alimi wrote:
> draft-gu-alto-redistribution was originally intended to provide
> information about how one might implement redistribution, but
> (intentionally) we did not provide actual protocol specifications
> due to the variety of P2P protocols in the wild.  The dependency was
> non-normative.  If it seems "weird" to link to that from a
> standards-track document (i.e. even if we split Section 8 into a
> separate document) then that could be removed - it was only intended
> to give readers a pointer for how they might get started.

Rich: Thanks for the clarification.  More inline.

> If on the other hand, it makes sense to revive
> draft-gu-alto-redistribution and add it as a WG item we could do
> that too - back when we were presenting it it seemed like it didn't
> gain much traction, but if thinks have changed, then great :)

Pedantically speaking, draft-gu-alto-redistribution was never a
WG item, it was an individual document.  Thus, it can continue
in the same vein until such time that the WG decides how to handle
information redistribution.

Your original proposal of splitting out Section 8 (Redistribution) from
draft-ietf-alto-protocol as an extension, and thus make it normatively
dependent on the outcome of JOSE WG is still sound (again, as an
individual contributor).  It has my "+1" vote.

Assuming that the WG agrees to this, then draft-gu-alto-redistribution
could very well serve as the vessel for moving the redistribution
work ahead.  At some point, the charter will be expanded to include
extensions (the chairs will have to get their act together on this
one :-) ).

I am aware of at least two possible threads of work in progress
(redistribution and multi-cost) that could qualify as extensions to the
base protocol.

Thanks,

- vijay
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurbani@alcatel-lucent.com
Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/