Network Working Group                                   L. Dunbar
Internet Draft                                          Futurewei
Intended status: Informational                        K. Majumdar
Expires: January 9, 2023                              Microsoft
                                                          H. Wang
                                                           Huawei
                                                        G. Mishra
                                                          Verizon
                                                    July 11, 2022

          BGP Usage for 5G Edge Computing Service Metadata
           draft-dunbar-idr-5g-edge-compute-bgp-usage-00

Abstract
   This draft describes the problems in the 5G Edge computing
   environment and how BGP can be used to propagating additional
   information, so that the ingress routers in the 5G Local Data
   Network can make path selection not only based on the routing
   distance but also the running environment of the destinations.
   The goal is to improve latency and performance for 5G EC
   services.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be
   modified, and derivative works of it may not be created,
   except to publish it as an RFC and to translate it into
   languages other than English.

   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."



xxx, et al.            Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 1]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   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 7, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2022 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
      1.1. 5G Edge Computing Background......................... 3
      1.2. 5G Edge Computing Network Properties................. 4
      1.3. Problem#1: ANYCAST in 5G EC Environment.............. 5
      1.4. Problem #2: Unbalanced Anycast Distribution due to UE
      Mobility.................................................. 7
      1.5. Problem 3: Application Server Relocation............. 7
   2. Conventions used in this document......................... 8
   3. Usage of AppMetaData for 5G Edge Computing................ 9
      3.1. Assumptions.......................................... 9
      3.2. IP Layer Metrics to Gauge Application Behavior...... 10
      3.3. AppMetaData Constrained Optimal Path Selection...... 11
   4. Soft Anchoring of an ANYCAST Flow........................ 11
   5. Manageability Considerations............................. 13
   6. Security Considerations.................................. 13
   7. IANA Considerations...................................... 14
   8. References............................................... 14
      8.1. Normative References................................ 14
      8.2. Informative References.............................. 15


Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 2]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   9. Acknowledgments.......................................... 15

1. Introduction

   This document describes the problems in the 5G Edge computing
   environment and how BGP can be used to propagating additional
   information, so that the ingress routers in the 5G Local Data
   Network can make path selection not only based on the routing
   distance but also the running environment of the destinations.
   The goal is to improve latency and performance for 5G Edge
   Computing services.

 1.1. 5G Edge Computing Background

   In 5G Edge Computing (EC), one Application can be hosted on
   multiple Servers in different EC data centers that are close
   in proximity. The 5G Local Data Networks (LDN)that connect the
   EC data centers with the 5G Base stations consist of a small
   number of dedicated routers.

   When a User Equipment (UE) initiates application packets using
   the destination address from a DNS reply or its cache, the
   packets from the UE are carried in a PDU session through 5G
   Core [5GC] to the 5G UPF-PSA (User Plan Function - PDU Session
   Anchor). The UPF-PSA decapsulates the 5G GTP outer header and
   forwards the packets from the UEs to its directly connected
   Ingress router of the 5G LDN. The LDN for 5G EC is responsible
   for forwarding the packets to the intended destinations.

   When the UE moves out of coverage of its current gNB (next-
   generation Node B) and anchors to a new gNB, the 5G SMF
   (Session Management Function) could select the same UPF or a
   new UPF for the UE per standard handover procedures described
   in 3GPP TS 23.501 and TS 23.502. If the UE is anchored to a
   new UPF-PSA when the handover process is complete, the packets
   to/from the UE is carried by a GTP tunnel to the new UPF-PSA.
   Per TS 23.501-h20 Section 5.8.2, the UE may maintain its IP
   address when anchored to a new UPF-PSA unless the new UFP-PSA
   belongs to different mobile operators. 5GC may maintain a path
   from the old UPF to the new UPF for a short time for the SSC
   [Session and Service Continuity] mode 3 to make the handover
   process more seamless.



Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 3]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service


  1.2. 5G Edge Computing Network Properties

   In this document, 5G Edge Computing Network refers to multiple
   Local IP Data Networks (LDN) in one region that interconnect
   the Edge Computing data centers. Those IP LDN networks are the
   N6 interfaces from 3GPP 5G perspective.

   The ingress routers to the 5G Edge Computing Network are the
   routers directly connected to 5G UPFs. The egress routers to
   the 5G Edge Computing [EC] Network are the routers that have a
   direct link to the EC servers. The EC servers and the egress
   routers are co-located. Some of those Edge Computing Data
   centers may have virtual switches or Top of Rack [ToR]
   switches between the egress routers and the servers. But
   transmission delay between the egress routers and the EC
   servers is negligible, which is too small to be considered in
   this document.

   When multiple EC servers are attached to one App Layer Load
   Balancer, only the IP addresses of the App Layer Load Balancer
   are visible to the 5G LDNs. How an App Layer Load balancer
   manages the individual servers is out of the scope of the
   network layer.

   The 5G EC Services are registered premium services that
   require super-low latency and very high SLA. Most services by
   the UEs are not part of the registered 5G EC Services.


















Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 4]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   +--+
   |UE|---\+---------+                 +------------------+
   +--+    |  5G     |     +--------+  |   S1: aa08::4450 |
   +--+    | Site +--+-+---+        +----+                |
   |UE|----|  A   |PSA1| Ra|        | R1 | S2: aa08::4460 |
   +--+    |      +----+---+        +----+                |
  +---+    |         |  |           |  |   S3: aa08::4470 |
  |UE1|---/+---------+  |           |  +------------------+
  +---+                 |IP Network |       L-DN1
                        |(3GPP N6)  |
     |                  |           |  +------------------+
     | UE1              |           |  |  S1: aa08::4450  |
     | moves to         |          +----+                 |
     | Site B           |          | R3 | S2: aa08::4460  |
     v                  |          +----+                 |
                        |           |  |  S3: aa08::4470  |
                        |           |  +------------------+
                        |           |      L-DN3
   +--+                 |           |
   |UE|---\+---------+  |           |  +------------------+
   +--+    |  5G     |  |           |  |  S1: aa08::4450  |
   +--+    | Site +--+--+---+       +----+                |
   |UE|----|  B   |PSA2| Rb |       | R2 | S2: aa08::4460 |
   +--+    |      +--+-+----+       +----+                |
   +--+    |         |  +-----------+  |  S3: aa08::4470  |
   |UE|---/+---------+                 +------------------+
   +--+                                     L-DN2
            Figure 1: App Servers in different edge DCs



   1.3. Problem#1: ANYCAST in 5G EC Environment

   Increasingly, Anycast is used by various application providers
   and CDNs because Anycast provides better and faster resiliency
   to failover events than GEO database DNS-based load balancing,
   which relies on DNS to provide a different IP based on source
   address.

   Anycast address leverages the proximity information present in
   the network (routing) layer. It eliminates the single point of
   failure and bottleneck at the DNS resolvers. Anycast address
   can be assigned to multiple app layer load balancers to


Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 5]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   leverage network condition for balanced forwarding. Another
   benefit of using the ANYCAST address is removing the
   dependency on UEs. Some UEs (or clients) might use their
   cached IP addresses for an extended period instead of querying
   DNS.

   Client using Virtual IP address is a common practice in Cloud
   Native networking, e.g., Kubernetes, to scale dynamic changes
   of app servers' instantiations. Virtual IP requires the
   destination gateway node to perform address translation for
   return traffic, which is unsuitable for underlay network nodes
   with millions of flows passing by. The Cloud Native network
   can also leverage network condition to balance forwarding
   among multiple Cloud Gateway nodes by assigning the same
   virtual IP address (ANYCAST).

   Having multiple locations of the same IP address in the 5G EC
   LDN can be problematic if path selection is solely based on
   routing cost as the routing cost differences to reach
   different egress routers can be very small. This list
   elaborates the issues in detail:

     a) Path Selection: When a new flow comes to an ingress node
        (Ra), how to avoid instability with Anycast flipping
        between paths to the same address.  The problem also
        exists in the BGP multipath environment, with the optimal
        path selected based on routing cost metrics.

     b) Ingress node forwards the packets from one flow to the
        same ANYCAST server.

        a.k.a. Flow Affinity, or Flow-based load balancing.
        Almost all vendors have supported flow or session based
        ECMP load balancing and not per packet to avoid out of
        order packets                           for decades.  When a flow is hashed to an
        ECMP path, the flow remains on that path for the life of
        the flow until the flow ends.

        The ingress node, (Ra/Rb), can use Flow ID (in IPv6
        header) or UDP/TCP port number combined with the source
        address to enforce packets in one flow being placed in
        one tunnel to one Egress router.  No new features are
        needed.




Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 6]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

     c) When a UE moves to a new 5G site in the middle of a
        communication session with an EC server, a method is
        needed to stick the flow to the same EC server, which is
        required by 5G Edge Computing: 3GPP TR 23.748. [5g-edge-
        compute-sticky-service] describes several approaches to
        achieve stickiness in the IPv6 domain.

        Note: most EC services have shorter sessions, e.g.,
        shorter TCP sessions. Most likely, when a UE is moving to
        a new 5G site, the TCP session via the old UPF to an EC
        server is already finished. Only a very small percentage
        of registered EC services need to stick to the original
        server when handover to a new cell tower.

   From BGP perspective, the multiple servers with the same IP
   address (ANYCAST)attached to different egress routers is the
   same as multiple next hops for the IP address.

   This draft describes the BGP UPDATE to enable ingress routers
   to take the App Server load, the capacity index, and the
   location preference into consideration when computing the
   optimal path to the egress routers.



 1.4. Problem #2: Unbalanced Anycast Distribution due to UE
     Mobility

   Usually, higher capacity EC servers are placed in a metro data
   center to accommodate more UEs in the proximity needing the
   services, and fewer are placed in remote sites. When there is
   a special event occurring at a remote site for a short period,
   e.g., 1~2 days, the EC servers in the remote site might be
   heavily utilized. In contrast, the EC servers of the same app
   in the metro DC can be very underutilized. Since the condition
   can be short-lived, it might not make business sense to adjust
   EC capacity among DCs. Sometimes, UEs swarming to a specific
   site are not anticipated.



  1.5. Problem 3: Application Server Relocation

   When an EC server is added to, moved, or deleted from a 5G EC
   Data Center, the routing protocol needs to propagate the



Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 7]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   changes to 5G PSA or the PSA adjacent routers.  After the
   change, the cost associated with the site might change as
   well.

   Note: for ease of description, the Edge Application Server and
   Application Server are used interchangeably throughout this
   document.

2. Conventions used in this document

   A-ER:       Egress Router to an Application Server, [A-ER] is
               used to describe the last router that the
               Application Server is attached. For a 5G EC
               environment, the A-ER can be the gateway router to
               a (mini) Edge Computing Data Center.

   Application Server: An application server is a physical or
               virtual server that hosts the software system for
               the application.

   Application Server Location: Represent a cluster of servers at
               one location serving the same Application. One
               application may have a Layer 7 Load balancer,
               whose address(es) are reachable from an external
               IP network, in front of a set of application
               servers. From an IP network perspective, this
               whole group of servers is considered as the
               Application server at the location.

   Edge Application Server: used interchangeably with Application
               Server throughout this document.

   EC:         Edge Computing

   Edge Hosting Environment: An environment providing the support
               required for Edge Application Server's execution.

               NOTE: The above terminologies are the same as
               those used in 3GPP TR 23.758

   Edge DC:    Edge Data Center, which provides the Edge
               Computing Hosting Environment. An Edge DC might


Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 8]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

               host 5G core functions in addition to the
               frequently used application servers.

   gNB         next generation Node B

   L-DN:       Local Data Network

   PSA:        PDU Session Anchor (UPF)

   SSC:        Session and Service Continuity

   UE:         User Equipment

   UPF:        User Plane Function


   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
   NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT
   RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be
   interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when,
   and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.


3. Usage of AppMetaData for 5G Edge Computing

   AppMetaData consists of metrics about the running environment
   at the egress routers to which EC servers are directly
   attached.

  3.1. Assumptions

   From the IP Layer, the EC servers or their respective load
   balancers are identified by their IP addresses. Those IP
   addresses are the identifiers to the EC servers throughout
   this document. Here are some assumptions about the 5G EC
   services:
     - Only the registered EC services, which are only a small
        portion of the services, need to incorporate the
        destination capacity metrics for optimal forwarding.
     - The 5G EC controller or management system can send those
        EC service identifiers to relevant routers.
     - The ingress routers' local BGP path compute algorithm
        includes a special plugin that can compute the path to



Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023           [Page 9]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

        the optimal Next Hop (egress router) based on the BGP
        AppMetaData TLV received for the registered EC services.

   The proposed solution is for the egress routers, a.k.a. A-ERs
   in this document, that have direct links to the EC Servers to
   collect various measurements about the Servers' running status
   [5G-EC-Metrics] and advertise the metrics to other routers in
   5G EC LDN (Local Data Network).

  3.2. IP Layer Metrics to Gauge Application Behavior

   [5G-EC-Metrics] describes the IP Layer Metrics that can gauge
   the application servers running status and environment:

   - IP-Layer Metric for App Server Load Measurement:
     The Load Measurement to an App Server is a weighted
     combination of the number of packets/bytes to the App Server
     and the number of packets/bytes from the App Server which
     are collected by the A-ER to which the App Server is
     directly attached.
     The A-ER is configured with an ACL that can filter out the
     packets for the Application Server.
   - Capacity Index
     a numeric number, configured on all A-ERs in the domain
     consistently, is used to represent the capacity of the
     application server attached to an A-ER. At some sites, the
     IP address exposed to the A-ER is the App Layer Load
     balancer that have many instances attached.  At other sites,
     the IP address exposed is the server instance itself.
   - Site preference index:
     is used to describe some sites are more preferred than
     others. For example, a site with higher bandwidth has a
     higher preference number than other.

   In this document, the term "Application Server Egress Router"
   [A-ER] is used to describe the last router that an Application
   Server is attached. For the 5G EC environment, the A-ER can be
   the gateway router to the EC DC where multiple Application
   servers are hosted.





Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 10]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service


 3.3. AppMetaData Constrained Optimal Path Selection

   The main benefit of using ANYCAST is to leverage the network
   layer conditions to select an optimal path to the application
   instantiated in multiple locations.

   When the ingress routers to the 5G LDN are informed of the
   Load and Capacity Index of the App Servers at different EC
   data centers, they can incorporate those metrics with the
   network path conditions for path selection.

   Here is an algorithm that computes the cost to reach the App
   Servers attached to Site-i relative to another site, say Site-
   b. When the reference site, Site-b, is plugged in the formula,
   the cost is 1. So, if the formula returns a value less than 1,
   the cost to reach Site-i is less than reaching Site-b.

               CP-b * Load-i                Pref-b * Network-Delay-i
  Cost-i= (w *(----------------) + (1-w) *(-------------------------))
              CP-i * Load-b                Pref-i * Network-Delay-b


      Load-i: Load Index at Site-i, it is the weighted
      combination of the total packets or/and bytes sent to and
      received from the Application Server at Site-i during a
      fixed time period.

      CP-i: capacity index at Site-i, a higher value means higher
      capacity.

      Delay-i: Network latency measurement (RTT) to the A-ER that
      has the Application Server attached at the site-i.

      Pref-i: Preference index for the Site-i, a higher value
      means higher preference.

      w: Weight for load and site information, which is a value
      between 0 and 1. If smaller than 0.5, Network latency and
      the site Preference have more influence; otherwise, Server
      load and its capacity have more influence.

4. Soft Anchoring of an ANYCAST Flow
   "Sticky Service" in the 3GPP Edge Computing specification
   (3GPP TR 23.748) is about flows from a UE sticking to a
   specific location when the UE moves from one 5G Site to
   another.


Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 11]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   "Soft Anchoring" is a mechanism for ingress routers to apply
   preference to the path towards the previous server location
   when the UE is anchored to a new UPF and continue using its
   cached IP for the EC server.

   Let's assume one application "App.net" is instantiated on
   four servers that are attached to four different routers R1,
   R2, R3, and R4 respectively. It is desired for packets to the
   "App.net" from UE-1 to stick with one server, say the App
   Server attached to R1, even when the UE moves from one 5G
   site to another. However, when there is a failure reaching R1
   or the Application Server attached to R1, the packets of the
   flow "App.net" from UE-1 need to be forwarded to the
   Application Server attached to R2, R3, or R4.

   We call this kind of sticky service "Soft Anchoring", meaning
   that anchoring to the site of R1 is preferred, but other
   sites can be chosen when the preferred site encounters a
   failure.

   Here is a mechanism to achieve Soft Anchoring:

      - Assign a group of ANYCAST addresses to one application.
        For example, "App.net" is assigned with 4 ANYCAST
        addresses, L1, L2, L3, and L4. L1/L2/L3/L4 represents
        the location preferred ANYCAST addresses.
      - For the App.net Server attached to a router, the router
        has four Stub links to the same Server, L1, L2, L3, and
        L4 respectively. The cost to L1, L2, L3, and L4 is
        assigned differently for different egress routers. For
        example,
           o When attached to R1, the L1 has the lowest cost,
             say 10, when attached to R2, R3, and R4, the L1 can
             have a higher cost, say 30.
           o ANYCAST L2 has the lowest cost when attached to R2,
             higher cost when attached to R1, R3, R4
             respectively.
           o ANYCAST L3 has the lowest cost when attached to R3,
             higher cost when attached to R1, R2, R4
             respectively, and





Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 12]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

           o ANYCAST L4 has the lowest cost when attached to R4,
             higher cost when attached to R1, R2, R3
             respectively
      - When a UE queries for the "App.net" for the first time,
        the DNS reply has the location preferred ANYCAST
        address, say L1, based on where the query is initiated.
      - When the UE moves from one 5G site-A to Site-B, UE
        continues sending packets of the "App.net" to ANYCAST
        address L1. The routers will continue sending packets to
        R1 because the total cost for the App.net instance for
        ANYCAST L1 is lowest at R1. If any failure occurs making
        R1 not reachable, the packets of the "App.net" from UE-1
        will be sent to R2, R3, or R4 (depending on the total
        cost to reach L1 attached to R2/R3/R4).


   If the Application Server supports the HTTP redirect, more
   optimal forwarding can be achieved.

      - When a UE queries for the "App.net" for the first time,
        the global DNS reply has the ANYCAST address G1, which
        has the same cost regardless of where the Application
        servers are attached.
      - When the UE initiates the communication to G1, the
        packets from the UE will be sent to the Application
        Server that has the lowest cost, say the Server attached
        to R1. The Application server is instructed with HTTPs
        Redirect to reply with a location-specific URL, say
        App.net-Loc1. The client on the UE will query the DNS
        for App.net-Loc1 and get the response of ANYCAST L1. The
        subsequent packets from the UE-1 for App.net are sent to
        L1.

5. Manageability Considerations

     To be added.

6. Security Considerations


   To be added.


Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 13]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

7. IANA Considerations

   Here are new Sub-TLV types requiring IANA registration:

   Type = TBD1: Aggregated Load Measurement Index derived from
   the Weighted combination of bytes/packets sent to/received
   from the App server.

   Type = TBD2: Raw measurements of packets/bytes to/from the
   App Server address.

   Type = TBD3: Capacity value sub-TLV

   Type = TBD4: Site preference value sub-TLV



8. References


  8.1. Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC4364] E. rosen, Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
             networks (VPNs)", Feb 2006.

   [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in
             RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI
             10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, <https://www.rfc-
             editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8200] s. Deering R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
             (IPv6) Specification", July 2017











Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 14]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

  8.2. Informative References

   [3GPP-EdgeComputing] 3GPP TR 23.748, "3rd Generation
             Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group
             Services and System Aspects; Study on enhancement of
             support for Edge Computing in 5G Core network
             (5GC)", Release 17 work in progress, Aug 2020.

   [5G-EC-Metrics] L. Dunbar, H. Song, J. Kaippallimalil, "IP
             Layer Metrics for 5G Edge Computing Service", draft-
             dunbar-ippm-5g-edge-compute-ip-layer-metrics-00,
             work-in-progress, Oct 2020.

   [5G-Edge-Sticky] L. Dunbar, J. Kaippallimalil, "IPv6 Solution
             for 5G Edge Computing Sticky Service", draft-dunbar-
             6man-5g-ec-sticky-service-00, work-in-progress, Oct
             2020.

   [RFC5521] P. Mohapatra, E. Rosen, "The BGP Encapsulation
             Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) and the
             BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute", April 2009.

   [BGP-SDWAN-Port] L. Dunbar, H. Wang, W. Hao, "BGP Extension
             for SDWAN Overlay Networks", draft-dunbar-idr-bgp-
             sdwan-overlay-ext-03, work-in-progress, Nov 2018.

   [SDWAN-EDGE-Discovery] L. Dunbar, S. Hares, R. Raszuk, K.
             Majumdar, "BGP UPDATE for SDWAN Edge Discovery",
             draft-dunbar-idr-sdwan-edge-discovery-00, work-in-
             progress, July 2020.

   [Tunnel-Encap] E. Rosen, et al "The BGP Tunnel Encapsulation
             Attribute", draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps-10, Aug
             2018.



9. Acknowledgments

   Acknowledgements to Sue Hares and Donald Eastlake for their
   review and contributions.



Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 15]


Internet-Draft      AppMetaData for 5G EC Service

   This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.



Authors' Addresses

   Linda Dunbar
   Futurewei
   Email: ldunbar@futurewei.com

   Kausik Majumdar
   Microsoft
   Email: kmajumdar@microsoft.com

   Haibo Wang
   Huawei
   Email: rainsword.wang@huawei.com

   Gyan Mishra
   Verizon
   Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com


























Dunbar, et al.         Expires January 9, 2023          [Page 16]