Re: [CDNi] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18: (with COMMENT)

Kevin Ma J <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com> Tue, 05 July 2016 18:45 UTC

From: Kevin Ma J <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHR1utgVwftRrLLA0ar1JjozwVDh6AKKvRA
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 18:45:11 +0000
Message-ID: <A419F67F880AB2468214E154CB8A556206E46002@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <20160705183053.22318.84284.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160705183053.22318.84284.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cdni/yHUeofN_rAGkOd7Tts-JBCARLqE>
Cc: "flefauch@cisco.com" <flefauch@cisco.com>, "cdni@ietf.org" <cdni@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-cdni-metadata@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-cdni-metadata@ietf.org>, "cdni-chairs@ietf.org" <cdni-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CDNi] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18: (with COMMENT)
Precedence: list

Hi Mirja,

  Thanks for the review.

> 1) It's still not really clear to me why the use of HTTPS is not
> mandatory... maybe that's related to my second comment below...?

  Are you referring to the use of HTTPS in retrieving metadata, or the use of HTTPS in delivery of the content?  For the former, we may need to update the security considerations text to match logging, triggers, and redirection; for the latter, we did not want to tackle the issue of how to distribute keys to dCDNs (though, LURK may help to address that issue).

> 2) I'm a little confused with the use of the term 'caching'. Maybe I'm
> assuming a wrong scenario, but to my understanding a dCDN would request
> metadata from an uCDN and simply store them. Or would the dCDN
> re-distribute the metadata it got from the uCDN to other dCDNs?

  I assume you mean caching of the metadata itself (and not caching of the associated content)?  The dCDN will store the metadata for its own use, as well as possibly re-distribute the metadata to further dCDNs.  The cache controls on metadata allows metadata to timeout without an explicit purge via the trigger interface.

thanx!

--  Kevin J. Ma

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mirja Kuehlewind [mailto:ietf@kuehlewind.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 2:31 PM
> To: The IESG
> Cc: draft-ietf-cdni-metadata@ietf.org; cdni-chairs@ietf.org;
> flefauch@cisco.com; cdni@ietf.org
> Subject: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cdni-metadata/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Two comments:
> 
> 1) It's still not really clear to me why the use of HTTPS is not
> mandatory... maybe that's related to my second comment below...?
> 
> 2) I'm a little confused with the use of the term 'caching'. Maybe I'm
> assuming a wrong scenario, but to my understanding a dCDN would request
> metadata from an uCDN and simply store them. Or would the dCDN
> re-distribute the metadata it got from the uCDN to other dCDNs?
>

Re: [CDNi] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Kevin Ma J
[CDNi] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ie… Mirja Kuehlewind