Re: [CDNi] [E] WGLC for draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-09

Dear Sanjay,

thank you very much for reading the draft carefully and for your 
comments! We will go through them and address them.

  - Jan (and co-authors)

On 20.02.20 00:12, sanjay.mishra=40verizon.com@dmarc.ietf.org wrote:
>
> I have review draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-09 and don’t 
> have any issues except some minor suggestions and nits.
>
> *Sec 1 Introduction:*
>
> 1.If by using “functionalities” below is meant to reference the two 
> RFC (RFC 7975 & RFC 8008), semantically, it may be better to state 
> that the request routing interface is covered in two separate RFCs and 
> reference the two RFC by name and number.
>
> a.Correspondingly, the request routing interface is broadly divided 
> into two functionalities: (1) CDNI Footprint & Capabilities 
> Advertisement interface (FCI), and (2) CDNI Request Routing 
> Redirection interface (RI).
>
> 2.(replace is -> are)
>
> a.A protocol to transport and update such objects between a uCDN and a 
> dCDN, however, is not defined
>
> 3.(delete “some”)
>
> b.In this way, a uCDN can effectively fetch capabilities of some 
> footprints in which it is interested
>
> 4.(add “as defined” instead of “defined” in two places in the sentence 
> starting as below)
>
> c.Throughout this document, we use the terminologies for CDNI defined…
>
> *Section 2.1:*
>
> 5.(replace “For a detailed discussions” with “For detailed information…” )
>
> d.For a detailed discussion, the reader is referred to the RFCs.
>
> 6.Remove extra sub bullet at the end of section 2.1 since there is no 
> text (check the document for other instances of bullet but no text).
>
> *Section 2.2:*
>
> 7.Remove reference to I-D.jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases
>
> 8.Replace (“Identifications -> Identification): Security: 
> Identifications between uCDNs and dCDNs are extremely important
>
> 9.Can an example be added of what unexpected cases authors envision?
>
> a.Error-handling: The ALTO protocol has undergone extensive revisions 
> in order to provide sophisticated error-handling, in particular 
> regarding unexpected cases
>
> *Section 6:*
>
> 10.Re-word (“First, we describe how to represent”)
>
> a.We firstly describe how to represent
>
> 11.Replace (“And then” with “Second”)
>
> *Section 8:*
>
> 12.Add a colon  after follows
>
> a.included as follows.
>
> 13.Needs some rewording for the sentence below:
>
> a.For availability of ALTO services, an attacker may get the potential 
> huge full CDNI
>
> Thanks
>
> Sanjay
>
> *From:*CDNi [mailto:cdni-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Vijay Gurbani
> *Sent:* Monday, February 3, 2020 10:08 AM
> *To:* IETF ALTO <alto@ietf.org>; cdni@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [E] [CDNi] WGLC for 
> draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-09
>
> All: Jan and I will like to start WGLC for
> draft-ietf-cdni-request-routing-alto-09.  The WGLC period will run 
> from Mon,
> Feb 3 2020 to Wed, Feb 19 2020.
>
> This email is also being cross-posted to the CDNI working group.
>
> We will like to have one WG list member from ALTO and one WG list 
> member from
>
> CDNI review this draft in depth.  Please send Jan and me an email if 
> you are willing
>
> review the draft as part of WGLC.
>
> In addition, we will like general reviews of the draft from both ALTO 
> and CDNI WGs.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CDNi mailing list
> CDNi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni