Re: [p2pi] Refining the ALTO problem statement [Was: Re: discussing P2PI-related standardization in Dublin]

Yes, I certainly didn't mean to imply that there was any problem with  
the "oracle" approach or the ALTO proposal - I am a strong supporter  
of this model. My only concern is that we don't limit our discussion  
to the one signaling protocol that was used as an example. My  
apologies if my (perhaps overly detailed) email came across as more  
negative than I intended. :-)

- LP

On Jun 13, 2008, at 10:37 AM, Enrico Marocco wrote:

> Laird Popkin wrote:
>> One point I'll make related to the signaling protocol for querying  
>> the
>> "oracle" is that while the "send in a list of peer IP addresses and
>> receive a sorted list back" approach is appealing in its  
>> simplicity, it
>> has some serious limitations that would need to be taken into  
>> account.
>
> Actually I used the term "oracle" in a general way, to refer to  
> servers
> providing information useful for peer selection.  The "sorting" oracle
> is only one proposed approach for addressing the problem of p2p  
> traffic
> optimization.  Other competing or complementary approaches, e.g. based
> on network coordinates or topology/policy information, have both
> advantages and disadvantages in respect to it.
>
> The main goal of ALTO is to compare the different approaches on a
> technical basis with a view towards standardization
>
> -- 
> Ciao,
> Enrico

_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi