Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Footprint Types: Country Subdivision Code and Footprint Union
draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types-12
Technical Summary
Open Caching architecture is a use case of Content Delivery Networks
Interconnection (CDNI) in which the commercial Content Delivery
Network (CDN) is the upstream CDN (uCDN) and the ISP caching layer
serves as the downstream CDN (dCDN). This document supplements the
CDNI Metadata Footprint Types defined in RFC 8006. The Footprint
Types defined in this document can be used for Footprint objects as
part of the Metadata interface (MI) defined in RFC 8006 or the
Footprint & Capabilities Advertisement interface (FCI) defined in RFC
8008. The document also updates RFC 9241 with relevant ALTO entity
domain types. The defined Footprint Types are derived from
requirements raised by Open Caching but are also applicable to CDNI
use cases in general.
Working Group Summary
The contents of the document have been reviewed by the CDNI WG, with discussion
on the list and during our IETF sessions. There was fairly broad consensus.
There was extensive discussion about the semantics of footprint combination
(both the original intent of the authors and what the actual implementation
should be). Accepting the shepherd's assertion on the original intent (as an original
author), the wg came to a solution to meet implementation needs. Approaching WGLC,
a question was raised as to whether an even more granular footprint should be
specified (i.e., coordinate boundary-based vs ISO3166-2). It was not clear
that a use case existed yet for the more granular footprint, but existing
commercial need for ISO3166-2 was expressed, so the wg chose to more forward with
the simpler solution for now (with the option to revisit more granular
footprint options in the future).
During WGLC, RFC9241 made it through the RFCEditor queue and the WG consulted with
them wrt the impact a new footprint type would have on RFC9241. Multiple
options were discussed on the list and at IETF114, and it was decided to
incorporate ALTO IANA registrations in this document to allow RFC9241 to use
the new ISO3166-2 footprint type as well.
Document Quality
The WG has reviewed the new footprint types
and agreed that they are reasonable and valuable. We are requesting
publication as "Proposed Standard" as the footprint types extend the exiting
RFC8006 proposed standard.
As one of the primary authors of both
RFC8006 and RFC8008, and acting as both the expert reviewer and shepherd,
the shepherd feels that the contents are straight forward and inline with the purposes and
goals of RFC8006 and RFC8008.
The shepherd's understanding is that SVTA vendors have implemented these extensions.
Personnel
Document Shepherd: Kevin J. Ma
Responsible AD: Francesca Palombini