[alto] Review of draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-02

Haizhou Du <duhaizhou@gmail.com> Fri, 01 December 2017 14:33 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: haizhou.du@cs.yale.edu
From: Haizhou Du <duhaizhou@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 22:33:33 +0800
Message-ID: <CADdws+y30doQ6OErX+vy3kn21x28OeWRTMcvjAVDrV5s5=8QcA@mail.gmail.com>
To: bill.wu@huawei.com, IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045d58c0dfa49e055f4840b0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/kFD5vZnRgWA5hlOh1c51SRnmsgE>
Subject: [alto] Review of draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-02
Precedence: list

Dear Qin and whole ALTO Working Group,
I just reviewed the draft-ietf-performance-metrics-02, and see the Kai and
Qin mails.Below are some of my opinions. Your feedback and comments are
highly appreciated.
========================================================

1. p5,  The very purpose of ALTO is to guide application traffic with
provider network centric information that may be exposed to ALTO Clients in
the form of network performance metric values.

-> The very important purpose of ALTO is to guide application traffic with
provider network-centric
information that may be exposed to ALTO Clients in the form of network
performance metric values.

2. p6,  The metric specifications may also expose the utilised aggregation
laws.

-> The metric specifications may also expose the utilized aggregation laws.

3.  I also agree with Kai option of section 2.  Section 2 describes three
challenges. Why not split 3 subsections as follows?
2.1 Data Sources Challenges
2.2 Configuration Parameters Challenges
2.3 Availability of Path values  Challenges

I think it's more clear and direct to the readers.


-- 
Thanks a lot!
Sincerely!
*************************************************************
Haizhou Du,
*************************************************************

[alto] Review of draft-ietf-alto-performance-metr… Haizhou Du
Re: [alto] Review of draft-ietf-alto-performance-… Qin Wu