Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (alto)
"Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com> Wed, 15 October 2008 00:08 UTC
Return-Path: <p2pi-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: p2pi-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-p2pi-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A7EF3A6878; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: p2pi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2pi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EDF13A6765; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.368
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.368 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.769, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mxb+ulzsSkvr; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com (wolverine02.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 815E23A6784; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=vidyan@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1224029392; x=1255565392; h=from:to:cc:date:subject:thread-topic:thread-index: message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language: content-language:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator: acceptlanguage:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version:x-ironport-av; z=From:=20"Narayanan,=20Vidya"=20<vidyan@qualcomm.com>|To: =20Martin=20Stiemerling=20<Stiemerling@nw.neclab.eu>,=0D =0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20"Vijay=20K.=20Gurbani"=0D=0A =09<vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>|CC:=20"p2pi@ietf.org"=20<p2pi @ietf.org>,=20IESG=20IESG=20<iesg@ietf.org>,=0D=0A=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20"ietf@ietf.org"=20<ietf@ietf.org>|Date: =20Tue,=2014=20Oct=202008=2017:09:49=20-0700|Subject:=20R E:=20[p2pi]=20WG=20Review:=20Application-Layer=20Traffic =20Optimization=20(alto)|Thread-Topic:=20[p2pi]=20WG=20Re view:=20Application-Layer=20Traffic=20Optimization=20(alt o)|Thread-Index:=20AckrB8UxxycZhW5DQNmtzaNDmm9pNgACj0qwAI wwruAAOrX48A=3D=3D|Message-ID:=20<BE82361A0E26874DBC2ED1B A244866B9276376FA@NALASEXMB08.na.qualcomm.com> |References:=20<20081006203532.B1D673A68AF@core3.amsl.com ><BE82361A0E26874DBC2ED1BA244866B9276373BA@NALASEXMB08.na .qualcomm.com><48EFA1B7.7010508@alcatel-lucent.com>=0D=0A =20<BE82361A0E26874DBC2ED1BA244866B92763750C@NALASEXMB08. na.qualcomm.com>=0D=0A=20<547F018265F92642B577B986577D671 C3DF92C@VENUS.office>|In-Reply-To:=20<547F018265F92642B57 7B986577D671C3DF92C@VENUS.office>|Accept-Language:=20en-U S|Content-Language:=20en-US|X-MS-Has-Attach: |X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:|acceptlanguage:=20en-US |Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"us-ascii" |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted-printable |MIME-Version:=201.0|X-IronPort-AV:=20E=3DMcAfee=3Bi=3D"5 300,2777,5405"=3B=20a=3D"10888453"; bh=YSzut+m+1iWPWRx9e+duBhJoFm4RN8RYXFwekKZ0nAc=; b=by66SRVTVtWbVizwpmkpb6jtuPqJvuqhvedpAeFrpBIV/ZbjJpJtTfD7 U3D13eBJeOLZyW/9+Uq+6Kt7PW/mW6KrRCysPoWH3qySNs+ef77mzpYEs EURty5e3o2XalhezXRr62l92I0GqwYIjtkScesLXWZeThALi1Q6mcVKhr s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5300,2777,5405"; a="10888453"
Received: from pdmz-ns-mip.qualcomm.com (HELO ithilien.qualcomm.com) ([199.106.114.10]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 14 Oct 2008 17:09:52 -0700
Received: from msgtransport04.qualcomm.com (msgtransport04.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.156]) by ithilien.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m9F09pdx011861 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:09:51 -0700
Received: from nasanexhc02.na.qualcomm.com (nasanexhc02.na.qualcomm.com [172.30.33.23]) by msgtransport04.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m9F09oUp001954 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:09:51 -0700
Received: from nasanexhub06.na.qualcomm.com (129.46.134.254) by nasanexhc02.na.qualcomm.com (172.30.33.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.291.1; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:09:50 -0700
Received: from nalasexhc01.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.129.185) by nasanexhub06.na.qualcomm.com (129.46.134.254) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.291.1; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:09:50 -0700
Received: from NALASEXMB08.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.16.13]) by nalasexhc01.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.129.185]) with mapi; Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:09:49 -0700
From: "Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com>
To: Martin Stiemerling <Stiemerling@nw.neclab.eu>, "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:09:49 -0700
Thread-Topic: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (alto)
Thread-Index: AckrB8UxxycZhW5DQNmtzaNDmm9pNgACj0qwAIwwruAAOrX48A==
Message-ID: <BE82361A0E26874DBC2ED1BA244866B9276376FA@NALASEXMB08.na.qualcomm.com>
References: <20081006203532.B1D673A68AF@core3.amsl.com><BE82361A0E26874DBC2ED1BA244866B9276373BA@NALASEXMB08.na.qualcomm.com><48EFA1B7.7010508@alcatel-lucent.com> <BE82361A0E26874DBC2ED1BA244866B92763750C@NALASEXMB08.na.qualcomm.com> <547F018265F92642B577B986577D671C3DF92C@VENUS.office>
In-Reply-To: <547F018265F92642B577B986577D671C3DF92C@VENUS.office>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "p2pi@ietf.org" <p2pi@ietf.org>, IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (alto)
X-BeenThere: p2pi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: P2P Infrastructure Discussion <p2pi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>, <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/p2pi>
List-Post: <mailto:p2pi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>, <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Martin, Given that Lisa is looking for solutions, I almost wish I have a solution thought out :) But, I don't. At the moment, I'm just saying that ALTO should be beyond *only* dealing with information from service providers. Peer selection is absolutely beyond just catering to ISP interests; peers have a vested interest in it - that said, information that peers are willing to share towards this is very valuable. We need to have interoperable ways of making that available and I do think this fits nicely with the ALTO objectives - going back to the root of the objectives, it is about peer selection and not just about ISP network utilization interests. Just to be clear, I am not downplaying the importance of ISP network utilization aspects - it is one component of the puzzle and there are others we need to consider along with it for a more complete picture. Thanks, Vidya > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Stiemerling [mailto:Stiemerling@nw.neclab.eu] > Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 8:03 AM > To: Narayanan, Vidya; Vijay K. Gurbani > Cc: p2pi@ietf.org; IESG IESG; ietf@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic > Optimization (alto) > > Hi Vidja, all, > > I believe that the charter is narrow and broad enough to > cover the topic of ALTO, i.e., the charter is not limiting > the solution space. > > However, when reading your comments, it sounds that you have > a very specific solution in mind which is probably not > covered by the current charter. > > [...] > > > > > > > > Overall, I think we should work with the notion of an ALTO > > "service" > > > > rather than specifically an ALTO "server". > > > > > > Great. I believe that is exactly what the charter does; the > > > charter talks in terms of an "ALTO service" at many places > > > (pedantically speaking, the term "ALTO service" occurs > eight times > > > and the term "ALTO server" occurs six.) The ALTO "server" > > > mentioned in the charter refers to the *host* the client finally > > > queries (calling it a "peer" is ambiguous; if you have a specific > > > term to use here instead of "server", please do let us know.) > > > > > > > When we consider ALTO as a distributed service, there may not > > necessarily be "a" host that specifically resolves the ALTO queries. > > For instance, consider the case where ALTO is a service > offered in an > > overlay. There may be peers publishing information about > themselves > > on the overlay and other peers looking up such information. > These are > > not necessarily client-server style communications. In > fact, all that > > is important in this context is that the overlay acts as a > rendezvous > > for sharing such information. Now, of course, that is one > possible model. > > You probably have a publish/subscribe system in mind for p2p overlays. > I assume this is not in scope of ALTO. > > > But, in order to allow for that and other models, I do want the > > charter to keep the focus on the service and not on a server. > > Is the IETF anyhow standardizing services? I don't see this. > > [...] > > > > > > > > We have had discussions on the mailing list about this already. > > > Some people felt that providing uplink bandwidth would > not be a good > > > idea for various reasons running from privacy concerns to peers > > > skewing traffic in favor of a high uplink bandwidth. > > > Others felt that even if a peers uplink bandwidth was not > provided, > > > it could calculated nonetheless by other peers. > > > That is, there are degrees of disagreement here and consequently, > > > including a contentious point in the charter would be counter- > > > productive. > > > > > > > I'm afraid that would be a mistake. It actually doesn't > matter if we > > I'm afraid that carrying up/downlink capacity of the peer's > local link is a complete waste of resource, as this is not > indicating something. For instance, a peer may have a > relatively huge uplink but on a shared medium, i.e., a medium > which might be shared by hundreds of other hosts/traffic. > So what does this information express? > > > don't agree today on the exact types of information that > can be shared. > > It is important that we have a protocol that allows peers > to publish > > ALTO related information. Having this protocol be extensible would > > allow for any type of information to be carried in it. So, > I strongly > > The question is, whether the roots of ALTO are actually > intended to carry any type of information? The main idea is > to carry information to optimize traffic, e.g., decreasing > cross ISP traffic. > > > believe we don't need a recharter to consider any > information types - > > in fact, I'd be okay if this effort only took on the > protocol and if > > all information types were to be registered through other > means. That > > said, I'm not against taking on some subset of those types > - I don't > > believe that should be the core focus of this work though. > > > > > > - The ability to register information types with IANA > and extend > > > > these. > > > > > > Having a IANA registry for the information type carried in the > > > protocol is certainly a possibility the charter does not > rule out, > > > no? > > > > > > > Well, it is a bit hard to say what the charter does not rule out - > > typically we try and do what the charter says we should do. > However, > > before we get to the registry, we need to agree on the protocol > > components. In my view, there are two such components - > the publish > > protocol mentioned above and the request/response protocol > (actually, > > more generically, a lookup protocol) mentioned below. > > It is good to see your ideas but doesn't this go beyond a > charter discussion, as your are discussing a solution? > > This comes back to my initial comment about discussing a > specific solution, and we haven't yet reached the times to > discuss a solution - at least not here. > > Martin > > > stiemerling@nw.neclab.eu > > NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC > Europe Limited | Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria > Road, London W3 6BL | Registered in England 2832014 > _______________________________________________ p2pi mailing list p2pi@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic Optim… IESG Secretary
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Sam Hartman
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Richard Barnes
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Daniel Park
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Philip Levis
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… stefano previdi
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… stefano previdi
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Enrico Marocco
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Bruce Davie
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lisa Dusseault
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Laird Popkin
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Enrico Marocco
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Martin Stiemerling
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Jan Seedorf
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Jan Seedorf
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Song Haibin
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lars Eggert
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lars Eggert
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Laird Popkin
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Ye WANG
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Philip Levis
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Song Haibin
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Lisa Dusseault
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Laird Popkin
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Das, Saumitra
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Woundy, Richard
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Enrico Marocco
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… toby.moncaster
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Laird Popkin
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Karl Auerbach
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Pekka Savola
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Vijay K. Gurbani
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Das, Saumitra
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Stanislav Shalunov
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Michael J. Freedman
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Dean Anderson
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Yu-Shun Wang
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Woundy, Richard
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Woundy, Richard
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Narayanan, Vidya
- Re: [p2pi] WG Review: Application-Layer Traffic O… Yu-Shun Wang