Re: [alto] Unified properties terminology clarification

Wendy Roome <> Thu, 19 November 2020 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E69453A0408 for <>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:19:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P1PB0ImDr_75 for <>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:19:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 021683A03F5 for <>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:19:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72FAB8FCD2; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:19:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [] (unknown [IPv6:2601:703:0:e3a0:65a8:7c63:75c6:992f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3827C8FC01; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:19:21 -0500 (EST)
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.42.20101102
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:19:18 -0500
From: Wendy Roome <>
To: Qin Wu <>, "" <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: [alto] Unified properties terminology clarification
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3688629561_1766249178"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [alto] Unified properties terminology clarification
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:19:25 -0000

Hi, Qin!


I'm Wendy Roome, and I wrote the original version of this draft. I stopped being active in this group after I retired in 2017, but I can describe the motivation for the title.


Back then, we had "costs" between pairs of "entities," and we were expanding the concept of "entities" to include more than just PIDs & IP addresses. We also had GET requests to return entire maps, and POST requests to return a filtered subset.


We also had a property service, but it was very restricted: it only applied to endpoints, it could not be extended, and it only allowed POST requests for specific endpoints rather than GET requests for an entire set. Furthermore, when I implemented the protocol, I suspected that many "properties" would really be associated with CIDRs or PIDs, rather than individual endpoints, and the endpoints would inherit those properties.


My goals were to make "properties" as extensible as costs, to provide the same choice of GET-mode for complete maps and POST requests for subsets, and to define an inheritance mechanism. That is, I wanted to "unify" properties and costs. Hence the original title. If that name no longer fits, by all means change it!


                - Wendy Roome


From: alto <> on behalf of Qin Wu <>
Date: Thu, November 19, 2020 at 07:33
To: "" <>
Subject: [alto] Unified properties terminology clarification


Hi, Sabine:

Follow up our discussion in today’s ALTO session, one issue I raised is about the terminology we used in the unified properties draft. I feel the term “unified properties” lacks clarity and causes a little bit confusion to people who are familiar with this draft, that is on is unified property break existing protocol or component such as

Endpoint property, I am wondering if we can change the term into property Map, so the title will be changed into “ALTO extension: Property Map” , which is also align with the title of Path vector draft, Does this make sense?

As you mentioned, this was discussed in the past, can you remind me the history discussion why the current name is picked. Thanks in advance, hope we can resolve this as soon as possible.



_______________________________________________ alto mailing list