Re: [alto] WG Review: ALTO Charter Update

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Wed, 05 May 2021 10:05 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 523953A0BCE; Wed, 5 May 2021 03:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4BBmyYF-nESI; Wed, 5 May 2021 03:05:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC8543A0BCC; Wed, 5 May 2021 03:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml734-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.226]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FZsZ559GRz71fcS; Wed, 5 May 2021 17:57:01 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.142) by fraeml734-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.215) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Wed, 5 May 2021 12:05:03 +0200
Received: from dggeml753-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.152) by dggeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2176.2; Wed, 5 May 2021 18:05:01 +0800
Received: from dggeml753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.152]) by dggeml753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.152]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Wed, 5 May 2021 18:05:00 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "alto@ietf.org" <alto@ietf.org>
CC: "alto-chairs@ietf.org" <alto-chairs@ietf.org>, 'Martin Duke' <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>, 'Zaheduzzaman Sarker' <zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: WG Review: ALTO Charter Update
Thread-Index: AddBkw49wYhuVK6ySH20qOce4DhuPg==
Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 10:05:00 +0000
Message-ID: <004de85cca0942e49536655788013ae6@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.136.123.117]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/ztgPsOFbO95nzjjVMdZdGiRCxbk>
Subject: Re: [alto] WG Review: ALTO Charter Update
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 05 May 2021 10:05:14 -0000

Thanks Adrian for valuable review and input, see my reply inline below.
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk] 
发送时间: 2021年5月1日 19:38
收件人: alto@ietf.org
抄送: alto-chairs@ietf.org; 'Martin Duke' <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>om>; 'Zaheduzzaman Sarker' <zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com>
主题: Re: WG Review: ALTO Charter Update

Hi Qin, Chairs,

Thanks for this.

> Dear Martin and working group,
>
> Thank you for the useful rechartering discussions on the mailing list 
> and
at IETF-110.
>
> I have listened to the people who say that further protocol work needs 
> to
be based on
> strong deployment needs, and I also hear very many different use cases
proposed. I 
> think we need more discussion and understanding to work out which use
cases are
> high priority and which are more research-based.

Agree. While research-based use of ALTO is important and encouraging, I think we need to focus on the primary use cases for IETF work. That is, we need to understand the steps that are needed to move ALTO into the next stage of implementations and deployments. As you hint, that is probably going to take some careful discussion and probably some time.

[Qin]:Exactly, we have discussed this in the ALTO design team meeting. We have agreed to use WG wiki page to keep track of implementations and deployments update. 

> This makes me think that we need a small short-term recharter to allow 
> us
to work on
> immediate issues (protocol maintenance, operational support) while we
discuss and
> investigate the best uses cases for further work.

That sounds like a very reasonable compromise: it allows the WG to fix small issues with the protocol, and (IMHO) operational support is fundamental and in need of attention; but it also doesn't make commitments to any specific additional protocol work before the discussions have completed.

I only have one comment on the proposed charter text...

> o Future use cases. The working group will provide a forum to discuss
>    possible future use cases. The objective of this discussion will be to
>    determine a small set of use cases that have strong support and a
>    realistic chance of implementation and deployment. The working
>    group will not develop protocol extensions for these use cases until
>    it has been re-chartered specifically for that purpose.

I'm glad this is explicitly in the charter and it supports your initial point about needing to discuss this point further. I think it is reasonable to say that the WG will not work on protocol extensions until a further re-charter.

But, this bullet item should say something about what the output of this charter item is. I think it is: "The working group will report back to the Area Director on the results of these discussions which may be documented in an email or in an Internet-Draft."

In turn, that would lead to another milestone:

* Report back to the Area Director to identify any use cases that have strong support and a realistic chance of implementation and deployment.

[Qin]: Good comment, this issue has been brought up by many ALTO design team members as well, one of proposal from ALTO team member is to accommodate this in the first deliverable, but the first deliverable only focuses on existing implementation deployment,
I think it make sense to add one more new milestones and also it encourages WG members to document new use cases and idea in the I-Ds.
Best,
Adrian