ALTO Performance Cost Metrics
draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-07

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00
• 01
• 02
• 03
• 04
• 05
• 06
• 07

ALTO Working Group                                                 Q. Wu
Internet-Draft                                                    Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track                                 Y. Yang
Expires: January 9, 2020                                 Yale University
                                                                  Y. Lee
                                                                D. Dhody
                                                                  Huawei
                                                          S. Randriamasy
                                                         Nokia Bell Labs
                                                           July 08, 2019

                     ALTO Performance Cost Metrics
                 draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-07

Abstract

   Cost metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic
   Optimization (ALTO), and is used in basic services including both the
   cost map service and the endpoint cost service.

   Different applications may use different cost metrics, but the ALTO
   base protocol documents only one single cost metric, i.e., the
   generic "routingcost" metric; see Sec. 14.2 of ALTO base
   specification [RFC7285].  Hence, if the resource consumer of an
   application prefers a resource provider that offers low-delay
   delivery to the resource consumer, the base protocol does not define
   the cost metric to be used.

   ALTO cost metrics can be generic metrics and this document focuses on
   network performance metrics, including network delay, jitter, packet
   loss, hop count, and bandwidth.  These metrics can be derived and
   aggregated from routing protocols with different granularity and
   scope, such as BGP-LS, OSPF-TE and ISIS-TE, or from end-to-end
   traffic management tools.  These metrics may then be exposed by an
   ALTO Server to allow applications to determine "where" to connect
   based on network performance criteria.  Additional cost metrics may
   be documented in other documents.

   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].

Wu, et al.               Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        ALTO Performance Cost Metrics            July 2019

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
   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 9, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Network Performance Cost Metrics  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  Cost Metric: One Way Delay (owdelay)  . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.1.1.  Intended Semantics  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       2.1.2.  Use and Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       2.1.3.  Measurement Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     2.2.  Cost Metric: RoundTrip Time (rtt) . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       2.2.1.  Intended Semantics  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.2.2.  Use and Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.2.3.  Measurement Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.3.  Cost Metric: Packet Delay Variation (pdv) . . . . . . . .   9
       2.3.1.  Intended Semantics  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.3.2.  Use and Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.3.3.  Measurement Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

Wu, et al.               Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 2]