Skip to main content

Shepherd writeup

1. Summary

Vijay K. Gurbani is the document shepherd for
draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto. Martin Duke is the responsible Area

RFC 8008 defines the semantics for the CDNI Footprint & Capabilities
Advertisement Interface (FCI). This document specifies a concrete protocol for
the CDNI FCI using the ALTO protocol. A new ALTO service called the "CDNI
Advertisement Service" which conveys JSON objects of media type
"application/alto-cdni+json" is defined. This service can convey CDNI FCI Base
Advertisement Objects as defined in RFC8008 to ALTO clients via the ALTO
protocol.  This document is targeted as a Standards Track document (Proposed
Standard). This designation is appropriate as the document contains normative
behaviour and message formats that should be adhered to by the communicating
entities in order to realize the extension.

2. Review and Consensus
The “ALTO Service for CDNI FCI” had been added as a new ALTO WG milestone in
2017, following an agreement between the CDNI WG and the ALTO WG to finalise
the ALTO service for conveying (i.e transporting) CDNI FCI objects in the ALTO
WG. draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto has a long history and had been
iterated and presented multiple times in the CDNI WG prior to 2017 (see
draft-seedorf-cdni-request-routing-alto).  The document is well-known in the
ALTO working group and has been presented many times. The approach is agreed
upon and no objections have been raised during the WGLC on
draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-09 in February 2020. All comments
from the individual reviews during the WGLC have since been addressed and the
document has been revised further multiple times since the WGLC (now in

In summary, there is clear consensus for
draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto in the ALTO WG, and it provides a
very useful extension needed also by the CDNI WG to convey CDNI FCI objects
defined in RFC8008. A WGLC has successfully been passed, and extensive reviews
were provided by various members of the WG and have all been addressed.

3. Intellectual Property
The shepherd confirms that each author has stated to him that to the best of
his/her (i.e. the author’s) knowledge, all IPR related to this document has
been disclosed.

4. Other Points
Note any downward references (see RFC 3967) and whether they appear in the
DOWNREF Registry
(, as these
need to be announced during Last Call.  All normative references are ok (with
respect to RFC 3967) as they are all towards documents with standards-level
“Proposed Standards”, “Internet Standard”, or “BCP”.