[alto] RFC 9439 on Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Performance Cost Metrics
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Sat, 12 August 2023 04:53 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.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 A3263C1CAB29; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 21:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.533
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_SOFTFAIL=0.732, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 dGjamwWVcitT; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 21:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (unknown [50.223.129.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B366C374845; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 21:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 463CEE7122; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 21:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, alto@ietf.org
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230812045216.463CEE7122@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 21:52:16 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/ngvbSd1dZ3RvEEvK6PhdCwBmtMw>
Subject: [alto] RFC 9439 on Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Performance Cost Metrics
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sat, 12 Aug 2023 04:53:07 -0000
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 9439 Title: Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Performance Cost Metrics Author: Q. Wu, Y. Yang, Y. Lee, D. Dhody, S. Randriamasy, L. Contreras Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: August 2023 Mailbox: bill.wu@huawei.com, yry@cs.yale.edu, younglee.tx@gmail.com, dhruv.ietf@gmail.com, sabine.randriamasy@nokia-bell-labs.com, luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com Pages: 35 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-28.txt URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9439 DOI: 10.17487/RFC9439 The cost metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO), and different applications may use different types of cost metrics. Since the ALTO base protocol (RFC 7285) defines only a single cost metric (namely, the generic "routingcost" metric), if an application wants to issue a cost map or an endpoint cost request in order to identify a resource provider that offers better performance metrics (e.g., lower delay or loss rate), the base protocol does not define the cost metric to be used. This document addresses this issue by extending the specification to provide a variety of network performance metrics, including network delay, delay variation (a.k.a. jitter), packet loss rate, hop count, and bandwidth. There are multiple sources (e.g., estimations based on measurements or a Service Level Agreement) available for deriving a performance metric. This document introduces an additional "cost-context" field to the ALTO "cost-type" field to convey the source of a performance metric. This document is a product of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC