ALTO Extensions to Support Application and Network Resource Information Exchange for High Bandwidth Applications
draft-lee-alto-app-net-info-exchange-03
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Young Lee , Dhruv Dhody , Qin Wu , Greg M. Bernstein , Taesang Choi | ||
| Last updated | 2013-10-17 | ||
| Stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | plain text htmlized pdfized bibtex | ||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-lee-alto-app-net-info-exchange-03
ALTO Working Group Young Lee
Dhruv Dhody
Qin Wu
Internet Draft Huawei
Intended status: standard Greg Bernstein
Grotto Networking
Tae Sang Choi
ETRI
October 17, 2013
ALTO Extensions to Support Application and Network Resource
Information Exchange for High Bandwidth Applications
draft-lee-alto-app-net-info-exchange-03.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 17, 2014.
Copyright Notice
Lee, et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
Copyright (c) 2013 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.
Abstract
This draft proposes ALTO information model and protocol extensions to
support application and network resource information exchange for high
bandwidth applications in partially controlled and controlled
environments as part of the infrastructure to application information
exposure (i2aex) initiative.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction..................................................3
2. Problem Statement..............................................5
3. ALTO Constraints Filtering Extension Model.....................8
3.1. ALTO Query from Application Stratum to Network Stratum....8
3.2. ALTO Response from Network Stratum to Application Stratum10
3.3. Information Model of ALTO Query from Application Stratum to
Network Stratum...............................................10
3.4. Information Model of ALTO Response from Network Stratum to
Application Stratum...........................................10
3.5. ALTO Protocol Extension for Constraints Filtering Mechanism
..............................................................11
3.6. Multiple Service Class...................................13
3.6.1. Gold Service........................................13
3.6.2. Silver Service......................................14
3.6.3. Bronze Service......................................16
4. ALTO Protocol Extension for Graph Representation Mechanism....18
5. Summary and Conclusion........................................18
6. Security Considerations.......................................18
7. IANA Considerations...........................................18
8. References....................................................18
8.1. Informative References...................................18
Author's Addresses...............................................19
Intellectual Property Statement..................................19
Disclaimer of Validity...........................................20
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
1. Introduction
This draft proposes ALTO information model and protocol extensions
to support application and network resource information exchange for
high bandwidth applications in partially controlled and controlled
environments as part of the infrastructure to application
information exposure (i2aex) initiative. The Controlled and
partially controlled ALTO environments referred to here are those
where general access to a specific ALTO server may be restricted to
a qualified list of clients.
This draft is build upon the previously introduced High Bandwidth
Use Cases [HighBW]. In [HighBW], we have discussed two generic use
cases that motivate the usefulness of general interfaces for cross
stratum optimization in the network core. In our first use case,
network resource usage became significant due to the aggregation of
many individually unique client demands. In the second use case
where data centers are sending large amount of data with each other,
bandwidth usage was already significant enough to warrant the use of
traffic engineered "express lanes" (e.g., private line service). We
introduce third use case where inter-CDN providers may want to
expose controlled network resource usage information so that CDN
applications (e.g., request routing server) can utilize such
information when appropriate decisions (e.g., request routing
redirection) are needed.
These use cases result in optimization problems that trade off
computational versus network costs and constraints. Both featured
use cases show the usefulness of an ALTO interface between the
application and network strata in optimizing the networked
applications.
In particular, this draft introduces: (i) enhanced constraints
filtering extensions to the ALTO protocol to reduce extraneous
information transfer and enhance information hiding from the
network's perspective; (ii) constrained cost graph mechanism
encoding that enables enhanced application traffic optimization that
was introduced by [HighBW].
In controlled and partially controlled environments in which
operators are willing to share additional network stratum resource
information such as bandwidth constraints or additional cost types
of topology (e.g., graph or summary), it can be useful to reduce the
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
amount of information transferred from the ALTO server to the ALTO
client.
In considering information exchange between the application stratum
and the network stratum, especially from the network stratum to the
application stratum, the degree of information details is one of the
key concerns from the network providers' standpoint. On the one
hand, the network information has to be useful to the application;
on the other hand, the provided network information should hide
details about the network. In order to achieve these desired goals,
a simple enhancement to ALTO protocol would help significantly both
in reducing/filtering the amount of information and in increasing
the usefulness of the information from network to application.
Figure 1 shows ALTO Client-Server Architecture for Application-
Network information Exchange. Figure 1 shows that ALTO Client in the
application stratum can interface with ALTO Server in the network
stratum. With this architecture, a simple ALTO query mechanism from
application (via ALTO client) to network (via ALTO server) can be
implemented. According to this architecture, ALTO Client is assumed
to interact with the Application Orchestrator that has the knowledge
of the end-user (i.e., source) application requirement, Data Center
locations (i.e., destinations) and their resource information.
+--------------+
Resource Request | Application |
-----------> | Orchestrator |
+--------------+
| ALTO Client |
+--------------+
| /|\
ALTO Query | | ALTO Response
| |
| |
| |
\|/ |
+--------------+
| ALTO Server |
+--------------+
| Network |
| Orchestrator |
+--------------+
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
Figure 1 ALTO Client-Server Architecture for Application-Network
information Exchange
The Application Orchestration functions depicted in Figure 1
interfacing data centers and end-users are out of the scope of this
document. For simplicity purpose, Figure 1 doesn't depict the
detailed relationship between ALTO client and server. In fact, both
client and server don't need to be in the same administration
boundary. It can be inter-operator and one to many relationships.
For example, in the cases of inter-CDN environment or generic multi-
domain environment, ALTO client represents a request routing server
of upstream CDN operator and it interacts with multiple downstream
CDN operators for their network resource information to make
efficient decisions for desired quality CDN services. Interaction
methods can either iterative or recursive. That is, ALTO client can
interact with multiple ALTO servers directly or ALTO client can
interact with one representative ALTO server and subsequent
interaction is done by the representative one to rest of ALTO
servers.
The organization of this document is as follows. Section 2 discusses
the ALTO architecture in the context of the application and network
strata interaction. Section 3 provides ALTO Information model and
protocol extension to support ALTO Constraints Filtering Mechanism.
Section 4 provides ALTO information model and the protocol extension
to support ALTO Constrained Cost Graph Mechanism.
2. Problem Statement
One critical issue in Application-Network information exchange in
ALTO is the amount of information exchanged between the application
and network strata. The information provided by network providers
can be not so useful to the application stratum unless such
information is abstracted into an appropriate level the that
application stratum can understand.
In partially controlled and controlled environments, network
providers can furnish appropriately abstracted and pruned
information to the application stratum with the cooperation of the
application stratum that can indicate some level of filtering and
pruning in its query.
To reduce extraneous information this draft allows for "filtering"
(or "pruning") of the following information in query/response of the
ALTO pull model:
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
. Topology Filtering - reduction of the results to only those
specified set of source(s) and destination(s) instead of the
entire network cost map. Note that this mechanism is not new
in the current ALTO protocol. In the context of application-
network information exchange, this topology filtering can be
of a tremendous help in reducing the amount of data exchanged
between application and network.
. Multiple Service Class: ALTO server may provide multiple class
of service (Gold, Silver, or Bronze) and allow application to
request them accordingly.
. Multiple Cost: Alto server should be able to provide multiple
cost for a end to end path or abstract links in the graph.
. Optimization Criteria: The optimization criteria that the ALTO
server may use. For ex least number of hops, least amount of
delay (latency), etc.
. Constraint Filtering on paths or graphs (e.g., bandwidth,
latency, hop count, packet loss, etc.) - reduction of results
to only those that meet ALTO client specified cost bounds.
As discussed in [HighBW], in a controlled environment optimization
is significantly enhanced by sharing data related to bandwidth
constraints and additional cost measures [MultiCost], [TE-cost].
Such information may be considered sensitive to the network provider
just as application data, e.g., usage, demand, etc., may be
considered sensitive to an application provider. Section 3 provides
ALTO information model and protocol extensions to support topology,
multiple service class, constraints filtering mechanism.
Multiple Service Class supports gold, silver and bronze services and
is defined as follow:
. Gold Service
The customer (say an Enterprise Private DC) pay Top-Dollor to setup
network based on the actual demand. The Path (maybe a TE LSP) would
not be used by any other customer / application giving guarantee of
service and best QoE to the application.
. Silver Service
The customer (say a Gaming) which will pay flat subscription fees
only. In this case during the setup phase a flat full mesh of
tunnels are established between the User regions and the Data
Centers.
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
The Application gaming load balncer would handle the end user by
allocating him to a particular DC (gaming server). The reserved
resources during admin setup are allocated to multiple end user
requests.
. Bronze Service
The customer (say a Video service) pays nothing. Best effort
service, use IP best effort path instead of reserved path. The
application (global load balancer) could get the network abstract
topology and would further handle the end user request by allocating
them to a particular DC or CDN. The ALTO message exchange for these
multiple class of service are further described in Sec 3.6.
While it is important to reduce and filter the information amount
from network to application, for some applications that require
stringent QoS objectives (e.g., bandwidth and latency), simple
summary source-destination network resource information (i.e.,
summary form of topology) may not provide sufficient details to the
application stratum. For example, suppose that a multiple number of
large concurrent flows need to be scheduled from application to
network. In such a case, a summary form of network topology that
only shows source-destination bandwidth availability may not show
the bottleneck links over which more than one flow may compete for
the link bandwidth resource. This problem was indicated by [HighBW].
The following are the excerpts from [HighBW].
Consider the network shown in Figure 2, where DC indicates a
datacenter, ER an end user region (as in the end user aggregation
use case), N a switching node of some sort, and L a link. The link
capacities and costs are also shown on the figure as well as a cost
map between [ER1, ER2] and [DC1, DC2, DC3]. Since the network has a
tree structure (very unusual but easier to draw in ASCII art), the
cost map is unique.
As an illustration, assume that the maximum available capacity
between any individual end region and a data center is 5 units(i.e.,
L1=L2=L5=L6=5). However, link L3 (capacity 8 units) represents a
bottle neck to all the data centers (L3 is on all the paths to DC1,
DC2, or DC3 from all end regions, ER1 and ER2).
ALTO Cost Map is shown in the lower right corner of Figure 2. This
summary cost map does not provide enough details on the bottle
necks. The lower left corner shows Link Capacity Cost, from which
the bottle necks can be shown such that multi-flow commodity
scheduling can be made possible to avoid such bottle necks.
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
,---. L1 +----+
( ER1 )`-. L5 .'|DC1 |
`---' `-._ ,-. / +----+
( N1) L3 ,-..'
.-'`-' `-.__ L4--(N3 )
,---. .' `-. ,-..--'' `-'`. +----+
( ER2 ).-'L2 (N2 ) L6 `-.|DC2 |
`---' `-'`-._ +----+
`-.
Link Capacity Cost `-._L7
L1 5 `-.
L2 5 `-._
L3 8 `-.
L4 6 ALTO Cost Map `-.+----+
L5 5 DC1 DC2 DC3 _ |DC3 |
L6 5 ER1 5 5 8 +----+
L7 10 ER2 6 6 9
Figure 2. Example network illustrating bottlenecks
With the current ALTO cost map structure, the least cost path from
ER1 would be either to DC1 or DC2. However, with the proposed
capacitated cost map, the connection from ER1 to DC3 could be a
better choice than the rest depending on the relative cost of
network resources to data center resources.
A more general and relatively efficient alternative is to provide
the requestor with a capacitated and multiply weighted graph that
approximates and abstracts the capabilities of the network as seen
by the source and destination location sets. This document provides
ALTO information model and protocol extensions to support the graph
model in Section 4.
3. ALTO Constraints Filtering Extension Model
3.1. ALTO Query from Application Stratum to Network Stratum
In order for the network stratum to provide its resource
information, the application stratum needs to provide the End Point
Cost Map to the network stratum. The End Point Cost Map should
include the following information at a minimum:
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
. End Point Source Address(es) /* these are the respective
addresses of the nearest PE's to the user/client location */
. End Point Destination Address(es) /* these are the respective
addresses of the nearest PE's to a set of the candidate Data
Center locations that can provide service to the user request.
*/
Note that how ALTO client derives the End Point Source/Destination
addresses in terms of the nearest PE's is beyond the scope of this
document.
. Service-Class:= {gold, silver, bronze} /*the service class as
described in this document*/
. Cost Type:= 'routingcost' as defined by base specification.
Additional cost (ex. latency, hopcount) are defined in
[MultiCost] and [TE-cost].
. Cost Mode :={summary, graph} /* the cost map can be either a
summary form or a graph form */
o Cost Mode: summary
This cost mode is indicated by string 'summary'. This mode
indicates that the returned costs contain end-to-end
values which can be used by application stratum for better
selection of resources.
o Cost Mode: gragh
This cost mode is indicated by string 'gragh' in which
case an abstract topology is returned to the application.
. Constraints /* a set of constraints that apply to the requested
path summary or graph for filtering. For instance, constraints
can be like bandwidth greater than 'x', latency less than 'y',
hopcount less than 'z', packetloss less than 'a' etc. */
. Objective-function (or Optimization Criteria): The summary or
the graph should be computed based on optimizing which
parameter - IGP cost, latency, residual bandwidth, etc. This is
for future use.
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
3.2. ALTO Response from Network Stratum to Application Stratum
In response to the ALTO Query from the Application Stratum, the
Network Stratum needs to provide the filtered Cost Map Data of the
feasible path found. The Filtered End Cost Map Data should include
the following information at a minimum:
. The list of feasible Source-Destination pair and its Cost Type
. For each feasible S-D pair, indicate the following:
. Constraints Values /* indicate the actual values of each
constraint requested */
Note that in case of Graph, each S-D pair is the source of the
abstract link and the destination of the abstract link.
3.3. Information Model of ALTO Query from Application Stratum to
Network Stratum
Alto query:
Object{
TypedEndpointAddr Src<1...*>; /*atleast one source*/
TypedEndpointAddr Dsts<2...*>; /*atleast two destinations*/
}EndpointList;
Object{
ServiceClass service-class;
CostMode cost-mode;
CostType cost-type;
[JSONString constraints<0...*>; ]
[JSONString ObjectiveFunction]
EndpointList endpoints;
}EndpointCostMapReq;
3.4. Information Model of ALTO Response from Network Stratum to
Application Stratum
Alto response:
Object-map{
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
JSONString costparam;
} EndpointCostParam ;
Object-map{
TypedEndpointAddr -> EndpointCostParam<1...*>;
} EndpointCosts ;
Object-map{
TypedEndpointAddr -> EndpointCosts;
} EndpointCostMapData ;
Object{
ServiceClass service-class;
CostMode cost-mode;
CostType cost-type;
[EndpointCostMapData map;]
}EndpointCostMapRsp;
The Alto response consist of map (EndpointCostMapData) which is map
containing the S-D pairs information. For each destination, its
parameters (rank, cost etc) is included using EndpointCostParam.
3.5. ALTO Protocol Extension for Constraints Filtering Mechanism
This section provides the ALTO protocol extensions based on the
information model discussed in Sections 3.3. and 3.4. The scenario
provided in this section is that the ALTO client in the Application
Stratum requests the summary cost map from the network with one
source and three destinations.
In this particular example, the ALTO client requests the filtered
summary of the network path subject to: bandwidth >= 20, latency <
10, hop count < 5 and packet loss < 0.03.
The ALTO server provides the resulted network paths in summary.
POST /endpointcost/lookup HTTP/1.1
Host: alto.example.com
Content-Length: [TODO]
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointcostparams+json
Accept: application/alto-csoendpointsummary+json,application/alto-
error+json
{
"service-class" : "silver",
"cost-mode" : "summary",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"constraints": ["bw gt 20", "delay lt 10", "hopcount lt 5",
"pktloss lt 0.03"],
"endpoints" : {
"srcs": [ "ipv4:192.0.2.2" ],
"dsts": [
"ipv4:192.0.2.89",
"ipv4:198.51.100.34",
"ipv4:203.0.113.45"
]
}
}
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: [TODO]
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointsummary+json
{
"meta" : {},
"data" : {
"service-class" : "silver",
"cost-mode" : "summary",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"map" : {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : [ "delay eq 5",
"hopcount eq 8", "pktloss eq 0.01", cost eq
100" ],
"ipv4:18.51.100.34" : [ "delay eq 9",
"hopcount eq 10", "pktloss eq 0.02", cost
eq 120" ],
"ipv4:203.0.113.45" : [ "delay eq 40",
"hopcount eq 12", "pktloss eq 0.02", cost
eq 50" ]
}
}
}
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
}
3.6. Multiple Service Class
3.6.1. Gold Service
In case of gold service, the application may like to find out the
ranking of the destinations (DC) from the network point of view. It
may further set the filtering constraints for bandwidth (bw), delay
etc.
Alto Request:
POST /endpointcost/lookup HTTP/1.1
Host: alto.example.com
Content-Length: [TODO]
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointcostparams+json
Accept: application/alto-
csoendpointsummary+json,application/alto-
error+json
{
"service-class" : "gold",
"cost-mode" : "summary",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"constraints": ["bw gt 20", "delay lt 10",
"pktloss lt 0.03", "jitter lt 10", "hopcount
lt 5" ],
"endpoints" : {
"srcs": [ "ipv4:192.0.2.2" ],
"dsts": [
"ipv4:192.0.2.89",
"ipv4:198.51.100.34",
"ipv4:203.0.113.45"
]
}
}
ALTO server would factor in the filtering constraints and provide
only the ranking information to the application.
Alto Response:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: [TODO]
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointsummary+json
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
{
"meta" : {},
"data" : {
"service-class" : "gold",
"cost-mode" : "summary",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"map" : {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : [ "rank eq 3" ],
"ipv4:198.51.100.34" : [ "rank eq 1" ],
"ipv4:203.0.113.45" : [ "rank eq 2" ]
}
}
}
}
3.6.2. Silver Service
In case of the silver service, application may want to setup a flat
full mesh of connection between the source(s) and destination(s)
meeting some basic constraints.
Alto Request:
POST /endpointcost/lookup HTTP/1.1
Host: alto.example.com
Content-Length: [TODO]
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointcostparams+json
Accept: application/alto-csoendpointsummary+json,application/alto-
error+json
{
"service-class" : "silver",
"cost-mode" : "summary",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"constraints": ["bw gt 20", "delay lt 10",
"pktloss lt 0.03", "jitter lt 10", "hopcount
lt 5" ],
"endpoints" : {
"srcs": [
"ipv4:192.0.2.2",
"ipv4:192.0.2.10"
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
],
"dsts": [
"ipv4:192.0.2.89",
"ipv4:198.51.100.34",
"ipv4:203.0.113.45"
]
}
}
ALTO server would factor in the filtering constraints and provide
the end to end cost parameters to the application.
Alto Response:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: [TODO]
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointsummary+json
{
"meta" : {},
"data" : {
"service-class" : "silver",
"cost-mode" : "summary",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"map" : {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : [ "delay eq 5", "jitter eq 5",
"pktloss eq 0.01", "hopcount eq 8",
"cost eq 100" ],
"ipv4:198.51.100.34" : [ "delay eq 9", "jitter eq 3",
"pktloss eq 0.02", "hopcount eq 10",
"cost eq 500" ],
"ipv4:203.0.113.45" : [ "delay eq 4", "jitter eq 4",
"pktloss eq 0.02", "hopcount eq 12",
"cost eq 200" ]
}
"ipv4:192.0.2.10": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : [ "delay eq 4", "jitter eq 4",
"pktloss eq 0.03", "hopcount eq 6",
"cost eq 300" ],
"ipv4:203.0.113.45" : [ "delay eq 6", "jitter eq 6",
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
"pktloss eq 0.04", "hopcount eq 8",
"cost eq 400"]
}
}
}
}
3.6.3. Bronze Service
In case of the bronze service, application may rely on the basic IP
best effort but would like to know the abstract topology that could
be used by the application to find out bottleneck etc. Note that no
constraints are passed in this example and graph is requested.
Alto Request:
POST /endpointcost/lookup HTTP/1.1
Host: alto.example.com
Content-Length: [TODO]
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointcostparams+json
Accept: application/alto-
csoendpointsummary+json,application/alto-
error+json
{
"service-class" : "bronze",
"cost-mode" : "graph",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"endpoints" : {
"srcs": [
"ipv4:192.0.2.2",
"ipv4:192.0.2.10" ],
"dsts": [
"ipv4:192.0.2.89",
"ipv4:198.51.100.34",
"ipv4:203.0.113.45"
]
}
}
ALTO server would prepare an abstract network graph based on the
source(s) and destination(s). The graph may also include some
internal (maybe abstract) nodes (ex 192.0.2.20 and 192.0.2.30).
Alto Response:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: [TODO]
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
Content-Type: application/alto-csoendpointsummary+json
{
"meta" : {},
"data" : {
"service-class" : "bronze",
"cost-mode" : "graph",
"cost-type" : "routingcost",
"map": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.20" : [ "delay eq 9", "jitter eq 2",
"pktloss eq 0.04", "bw eq 20", "cost eq
100" ]
}
"ipv4:192.0.2.20": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : [ "delay eq 5", "jitter eq 2",
"pktloss eq 0.02", "bw eq 30", "cost eq
100" ],
"ipv4:198.51.100.34" : [ "delay eq 3", "jitter eq 2",
"pktloss eq 0.01", "bw eq 50", "cost eq
400" ]
}
"ipv4:192.0.2.10": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.30" : [ "delay eq 4", "jitter eq 2",
"pktloss eq 0.01", "bw eq 60", "cost eq
300" ]
}
"ipv4:192.0.2.30": {
"ipv4:203.0.113.45" : [ "delay eq 2", "jitter eq 2",
"pktloss eq 0.03", "bw eq 10", "cost eq
200" ]
}
}
}
}
Note that the EndpointCostMapData can be used for both the Graph
representation as well as the end to end path.
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
4. ALTO Protocol Extension for Graph Representation Mechanism
The encoding details for graph representation mechanism are shown in
Section 3.6.3 where Bronze service is described.
5. Summary and Conclusion
TBD
6. Security Considerations
TBD
7. IANA Considerations
TBD
8. References
8.1. Informative References
[HighBW] G. Bernstein and Y. Lee, "Use Cases for High Bandwidth
Query and Control of Core Networks," draft-bernstein-alto-
large-bandwidth-cases, work in progress.
[MultiCost] S. Randriamasy, Ed., "Multi-Cost ALTO," draft-
randriamasy-alto-multi-cost, work in progress.
[TE-cost] Q. Wu, et. al. "JSON Format Extensions for Traffic
Engineering (TE) performance metrics in the ALTO
Information Resource Directory, draft-wu-alto-json-te,
work in progress.
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
Author's Addresses
Young Lee
Huawei Technologies
1700 Alma Drive, Suite 500
Plano, TX 75075
USA
Phone: (972) 509-5599
Email: leeyoung@huawei.com
Dhruv Dhody
Huawei Technologies, India
Email: dhruv.dhody@huawei.com
Qin Wu
Huawei Technologies, China
Email: bill.wu@huawei.com
Greg M. Bernstein
Grotto Networking
Fremont California, USA
Phone: (510) 573-2237
Email: gregb@grotto-networking.com
Tae-Sang Choi
ETRI
161 Gajong-Dong, Yusong-Gu
Daejon, Republic of Korea
Phone: (8242) 860-5628
Email: choits@etri.re.kr
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of
any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be
claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology
described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license
under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it
represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any
such rights.
Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF
Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Application and Network Information Exchange October 2013
the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or
permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or
users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line
IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please
address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are
provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION
HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY,
THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL
WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY
WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE
ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Lee et al. Expires April 17, 2014 [Page 20]