Spatial Aggregation Metrics for Multipary Services
draft-ionta-spatial-metrics-multiparty-services-02

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (individual in tsv area)
Last updated 2015-10-14 (latest revision 2013-06-04)
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats
Expired & archived
pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream WG state (None)
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state Expired (IESG: Dead)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD Wesley Eddy
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ionta-spatial-metrics-multiparty-services-02.txt

Abstract

One of the best chances for a Service Provider to face the complex growth of IP Services, and their challenging requirements/SLAs along the Core network, is to enrich the current Performance metrics - mainly derived from a Network-oriented point of view, and therefore a general perspective, not focused on specific services - with some more Performance factors, so to include a Service-oriented point of view, more centred on the particular kind of service, with its own characteristics in terms of protocol, application, manageability, and so on. To achieve the above goal, and starting from the one-to-group performance metrics outlined in RFC 5644 [RFC5644], an effort to a deeper analysis and definition of spatial aggregation metrics (as a part of the framework for metric composition defined in RFC 5835 [RFC5835])is proposed in this memo, where the main focus is on multiparty communications (e.g. video providers, online biding, online stock market, etc.). This memo lends itself to passive measurement as well as active measurement. Finally this memo is tuned to RFC 6390 [RFC6390] in terms of scopes, framework concepts, and need to widen the current performance metrics depending on the application, service etc.

Authors

Tiziano Ionta (tiziano.ionta@telecomitalia.it)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)