datatracker.ietf.org
Sign in
Version 5.6.3, 2014-09-19
Report a bug

Multi-Cost ALTO
draft-randriamasy-alto-multi-cost-08

Document type: Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Document stream: No stream defined
Last updated: 2014-07-04
Intended RFC status: Unknown
Other versions: plain text, pdf, html

Stream State:No stream defined
Document shepherd: No shepherd assigned

IESG State: I-D Exists
Responsible AD: (None)
Send notices to: No addresses provided

Network Working Group                                     S. Randriamasy
Internet-Draft                                                  W. Roome
Intended status: Standards Track                          Alcatel-Lucent
Expires: January 5, 2015                                       N. Schwan
                                                      Thales Deutschland
                                                            July 4, 2014

                            Multi-Cost ALTO
                  draft-randriamasy-alto-multi-cost-08

Abstract

   IETF is designing a new service called ALTO (Application Layer
   traffic Optimization) that includes a "Network Map Service", an
   "Endpoint Cost Service" and an "Endpoint (EP) Ranking Service" and
   thus incentives for application clients to connect to ISP preferred
   Endpoints.  These services provide a view of the Network Provider
   (NP) topology to overlay clients.

   The present draft proposes a simple way to extend the information
   provided by the current ALTO protocol in two ways.  First, including
   information on multiple Cost Types in a single ALTO transaction
   provides a better mapping of the Selected Endpoints to needs of the
   growing diversity of Content and Resources Networking Applications
   and to the network conditions.  Second, one ALTO query and response
   exchange on N Cost Types is faster and more efficient than N single
   cost transactions.  All this also helps producing a faster and more
   robust choice when multiple Endpoints need to be selected.  Last, the
   draft proposes to enrich the filtering capabilities by allowing
   constraints involving several metrics combined by several types of
   logical operators.  This allows the applications to set finer
   requirements and above all to include compromises on those
   requirements.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute

Randriamasy, et al.      Expires January 5, 2015                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               Multi-Cost ALTO                   July 2014

   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 5, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Application Scope And Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Uses Cases For Using Multiple Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  Use Cases For Using Additional Costs  . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.1.1.  Delay Sensitive Overlay Applications  . . . . . . . .   7
       3.1.2.  Selection Of Physical Servers Involved In Virtualized
               Applications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.1.3.  CDN Surrogate Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       3.1.4.  Some Proposed Additional Properties And Costs . . . .   9
     3.2.  Use Cases For Multi-Cost ALTO Transactions  . . . . . . .  10
       3.2.1.  Optimized Endpoint Cost Service . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       3.2.2.  Optimized Filtered Cost Map Service . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.2.3.  Cases Of Unpredicable Endpoint Cost Value Changes . .  11
         3.2.3.1.  Case Of A Multi-Cost ALTO Query Upon A Route
                   Change  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

[include full document text]