[alto] Review of draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-01

Yichen Qian <92yichenqian@tongji.edu.cn> Thu, 29 June 2017 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <92yichenqian@tongji.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDF97129B23; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 10:55:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2LUQrRXKKLD5; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 10:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tongji.edu.cn (mailusrsvr2.tongji.edu.cn []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D28BC129ADF; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 10:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) by mailusersvr2 (Coremail) with SMTP id PqR4ygBnr7PwPlVZO_iZAA--.4329S2; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:54:58 +0800 (CST)
From: Yichen Qian <92yichenqian@tongji.edu.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <299945C8-58C4-4BEA-98B7-9187F0F263CC@tongji.edu.cn>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:54:57 +0800
To: IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-CM-TRANSID: PqR4ygBnr7PwPlVZO_iZAA--.4329S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoWxCr45Cr4xZr13uFW8Wr4xXrb_yoW5Wr17pF 4S9FW7Kwsxtry2kanaq3WxKryS939rJFyjk34jqw4UAa15CF90vFZIg390kF47Gr1kCw1D Xw4jv398W3sFkr7anT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUk0b7Iv0xC_Kw4lb4IE77IF4wAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8I cIk0rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGwA2ocxC64kIII0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2 AK021l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvE14v26w1j6s0DM28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v2 6r4UJVWxJr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv67AKxVW0oVCq3wA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI 0_GcCE3s1le2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wAqx4xG64xvF2IEw4CE5I8CrVC2j2Wl Yx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbV WUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvY0x0EwIxGrwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCF04k20xvE74AGY7Cv6cx2 6F4UJr1UJwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I3I 0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jrv_JF1lIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAI cVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcV CF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rW3Jr0E3s1lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280 aVCY1x0267AKxVWUJVW8JbIYCTnIWIevJa73UjIFyTuYvjxUqEoXUUUUU
X-CM-SenderInfo: qrqrmmmu6w00xjmlhvlgxou0/
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/vatFqTj-set7ibQMHyqXmjck7zI>
Subject: [alto] Review of draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-01
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 17:55:07 -0000

Dear authors,

I think it’s quit useful to provide cost calendar for the users. Here’s my review of this draft. 

1. One concern is that the query result of Cost Calendar is not only related to regular data changes, but also can be affected by some unexpected topology changes, say link failures. So some cost in Cost Calendar can be abnormal and may mislead the user to do the inappropriate choice.

2. In the current design, the ALTO client only chooses if it needs the calendar.  Is it possible that the ALTO server has several options of different combinations of “time-interval-size” and “number-of intervals” for ALTO client to choose for more fine-grained Cost Calendars?

Other detailed modification:

In the 3rd paragraph of section 2.2, “A calendar and its capabilities are associated to a given information resource”
- associated to -> associated with

In the 1st paragraph of section 3, “A calendar is associated to an information resource rather than a cost type.”
- associated to -> associated with

In the 1st paragraph of section 3.1, ”by an object of type 'CalendarAttributes', associated to this Cost Type and specified below.”
- associated to -> associated with

In the 3rd paragraph of section 3.1, ”on this "cost-type-name" for this ressource entry.”
- ressource -> resource

In the 1st paragraph of section 4.1.3, ”as specified in the IRD to shedule its bulk data transfers as described in the use cases.”
- shedule -> schedule

In section 4.2.2, “include the same addifional member "calendar-response-attributes" as …”
- addifional ->additional

In the 1st paragraph of section 4.2.3, “Let us assume an Application Client is located in an end sytem with limited resources and …” 
- sytem -> system

In the 2nd paragraph of section 4.2.3, “the 'routingcost' is assumed to be time sentitive with values provided as ALTO Calendars.”
- sentitive -> sensitive

In the 3rd paragraph of section 4.2.3, "The ALTO Client associated to the Application Client …”
- associated to -> associated with

In the 4th paragraph of section 4.2.3, “the sollicited ALTO Server has …”
- sollicited -> solicited

In the 2nd paragraph of section 4.3, “An ALTO Server aquiring cost values in limited time intervals …”
- aquiring -> acquiring

In the 6th paragraph of section 5.1, “a small topology with low density and low capacity that carries inpredictable”
- inpredictable -> unpredictable

In the 3rd paragraph of section 5.2, “the interaction with Endpoints can be orchestratrated and scheduled at the time slots …”			
- orchestratrated -> orchestrated

The subtitle of section 6.2, “Information for IANA on proposed Endpoint Propeeries”
- Propeeries -> Properties

Best wishes,