Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Cost Calendar
draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-21

Network Working Group                                     S. Randriamasy
Internet-Draft                                           Nokia Bell Labs
Intended status: Standards Track                                 R. Yang
Expires: September 18, 2020                              Yale University
                                                                   Q. Wu
                                                                  Huawei
                                                                 L. Deng
                                                            China Mobile
                                                               N. Schwan
                                                      Thales Deutschland
                                                          March 17, 2020


      Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Cost Calendar
                    draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-21

Abstract

   This document is an extension to the base Application-Layer Traffic
   Optimization (ALTO) protocol.  It extends the ALTO cost information
   service so that applications decide not only 'where' to connect, but
   also 'when'.  This is useful for applications that need to perform
   bulk data transfer and would like to schedule these transfers during
   an off-peak hour, for example.  This extension introduces ALTO Cost
   Calendar, with which an ALTO Server exposes ALTO cost values in JSON
   arrays where each value corresponds to a given time interval.  The
   time intervals as well as other Calendar attributes, are specified in
   the Information Resources Directory and ALTO Server responses.

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 https://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 September 18, 2020.






Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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
   (https://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.  Some recent known uses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Overview of ALTO Cost Calendars and terminology . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  ALTO Cost Calendar overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  ALTO Cost Calendar information features . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.3.  ALTO Calendar design characteristics  . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.3.1.  ALTO Cost Calendar for all cost modes . . . . . . . .   9
       3.3.2.  Compatibility with legacy ALTO Clients  . . . . . . .  10
   4.  ALTO Calendar specification: IRD extensions . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.1.  Calendar attributes in the IRD resource capabilities  . .  11
     4.2.  Calendars in a delegate IRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.3.  Example IRD with ALTO Cost Calendars  . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  ALTO Calendar specification: Service Information Resources  .  17
     5.1.  Calendar extensions for Filtered Cost Maps (FCM)  . . . .  17
       5.1.1.  Calendar extensions in Filtered Cost Map requests . .  17
       5.1.2.  Calendar extensions in Filtered Cost Map responses  .  18
       5.1.3.  Use case and example: FCM with a bandwidth Calendar .  21
     5.2.  Calendar extensions in the Endpoint Cost Service  . . . .  23
       5.2.1.  Calendar specific input in Endpoint Cost requests . .  23
       5.2.2.  Calendar attributes in the Endpoint Cost response . .  24
       5.2.3.  Use case and example: ECS with a routingcost Calendar  25
       5.2.4.  Use case and example: ECS with a multi-cost Calendar
               for routingcost and owdelay . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29
   8.  Operational Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  33
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35

1.  Introduction

   The base Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) protocol
   specified in [RFC7285] provides guidance to overlay applications that
   need to select one or several hosts from a set of candidates able to
   provide a desired resource.  This guidance is based on parameters
   that affect performance and efficiency of the data transmission
   between the hosts such as the topological distance.  The goal of ALTO
   is to improve the Quality of Experience (QoE) in the application
   while optimizing resource usage in the underlying network
   infrastructure.

   The ALTO protocol in [RFC7285] specifies a network map which defines
   groupings of endpoints in provider-defined network regions identified
   by Provider-defined Identifiers (PIDs).  The Cost Map Service,
   Endpoint Cost Service (ECS) and Endpoint Ranking Service then provide
   ISP-defined costs and rankings for connections among the specified
   endpoints and PIDs and thus incentives for application clients to
   connect to ISP preferred locations, for instance, to reduce their
   costs.  For the reasons outlined in the ALTO problem statement
   [RFC5693] and requirement AR-14 of [RFC6708], ALTO does not
   disseminate network metrics that change frequently.  In a network,
   the costs can fluctuate for many reasons having to do with
   instantaneous traffic load or due to diurnal patterns of traffic
   demand or planned events such as network maintenance, holidays or
   highly publicized events.  Thus, an ALTO application wishing to use
   the Cost Map and Endpoint Cost Service at some future time will have
   to estimate the state of the network at that time, a process that is,
   at best, fragile and brittle since the application does not have any
   visibility into the state of the network.  Providing network costs
   for only the current time thus may not be sufficient, in particular
   for applications that can schedule their traffic in a span of time,
   for example by deferring backups or other background traffic to off-
   peak hours.

   In case the ALTO Cost value changes are predictable over a certain
   period of time and the application does not require immediate data
   transfer, it can save time to get the whole set of cost values over
   this period in one single ALTO response.  Using this set to schedule
   data transfers allows optimizing the network resources usage and QoE.
   ALTO Clients and Servers can also minimize their workload by reducing
   and accordingly scheduling their data exchanges.

   This document extends [RFC7285] to allow an ALTO Server to provide
   network costs for a given duration of time.  A sequence of network



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   costs across a time span for a given pair of network locations is
   named an "ALTO Cost Calendar".  The Filtered Cost Map Service and
   Endpoint Cost Service are extended to provide Cost Calendars.  In
   addition to this functional ALTO enhancement, we expect to further
   save network and storage resources by gathering multiple Cost Values
   for one cost type into one single ALTO Server response.

   In this document, an "ALTO Cost Calendar" is specified in terms of
   information resource capabilities that are applicable to time-
   sensitive ALTO metrics.  An ALTO Cost Calendar exposes ALTO Cost
   Values in JSON arrays, see [RFC8259], where each value corresponds to
   a given time interval.  The time intervals as well as other Calendar
   attributes are specified in the Information Resources Directory (IRD)
   and in the Server response to allow the ALTO Client to interpret the
   received ALTO values.  Last, the extensions for ALTO Calendars are
   applicable to any Cost Mode and they ensure backwards compatibility
   with legacy ALTO Clients - those that only support [RFC7285].

   In the rest of this document, Section 3 provides the design
   characteristics.  Sections Section 4 and Section 5 define the formal
   specifications for the IRD and the information resources.  IANA,
   security and operational considerations are addressed respectively in
   sections Section 6, Section 7 and Section 8.

1.1.  Some recent known uses

   A potential use case is implementing smart network services that
   allow applications to dynamically build end-to-end, virtual networks,
   to satisfy given demands, with no manual intervention.  For example,
   data-transfer automation applications may need a network service to
   determine on the availability of bandwidth resources, to decide when
   to transfer their data sets.  The SENSE project [SENSE-sdn-e2e-net]
   supports such applications by requiring that a network provides
   services such as the Time-Bandwidth-Product (TBP) service, which
   informs applications of bandwidth availability during a specific time
   period.  ALTO Calendars can support this service if the Calendar
   start date and duration cover the period of interest of the
   requesting application.

   The need of future scheduling of large scale traffic that can be
   addressed by the ALTO protocol is also motivated by Unicorn, a
   unified resource orchestration framework for multi-domain, geo-
   distributed data analytics, see [Unicorn-fgcs].








Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


1.2.  Terminology

   o  ALTO transaction: A request/response exchange between an ALTO
      Client and an ALTO Server.

   o  Client: When used with a capital "C", this term refers to an ALTO
      Client.

   o  Calendar, Cost Calendar: When used with capitalized words, these
      terms refer to an ALTO Cost Calendar.

   o  Calendared: this adjective qualifies information resources
      providing Cost Calendars and information on costs that are
      provided in the form of a Cost Calendar.

   o  Endpoint (EP): An endpoint is defined as in Section 2.1 of
      [RFC7285].  It can be, for example, a peer, a CDN storage
      location, a physical server involved in a virtual server-supported
      application, a party in a resource-sharing swarm such as a
      computation grid, or an online multi-party game.

   o  ECM: Is an abbreviation for Endpoint Cost Map.

   o  FCM: Is an abbreviation for Filtered Cost Map.

   o  Server: When used with a capital "S", this term refers to an ALTO
      Server.

2.  Requirements Language

   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.

   When the words appear in lower case, they are to be interpreted with
   their natural language meanings.

3.  Overview of ALTO Cost Calendars and terminology

   This section gives a high-level overview of the design.  It assumes
   the reader is familiar with the ALTO protocol [RFC7285] and its
   Multi-Cost ALTO extension [RFC8189].







Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


3.1.  ALTO Cost Calendar overview

   An ALTO Cost Calendar provided by the ALTO Server provides 2
   information items:

   o  an array of values for a given metric, where each value specifies
      the metric corresponding to a time interval, where the value array
      can sometimes be a cyclic pattern that repeats a certain number of
      times.

   o  attributes describing the time scope of the Calendar, including
      the size and number of the intervals and the date of the starting
      point of the Calendar, allowing an ALTO Client to interpret the
      values properly.

   An ALTO Cost Calendar can be used like a "time table" to figure out
   the best time to schedule data transfers and also to proactively
   manage application traffic given predictable events such as expected
   spike in traffic due to crowd gathering (concerts, sports, etc.),
   traffic-intensive holidays and network maintenance.  A Calendar may
   be viewed as a synthetic abstraction of, for example, real
   measurements gathered over previous periods on which statistics have
   been computed.  However, like for any schedule, unexpected network
   incidents may require the current ALTO Calendar to be updated and re-
   sent to the ALTO Clients needing it.  The "ALTO Incremental Updates
   Using Server-Sent Events (SSE)" Service
   [I-D.ietf-alto-incr-update-sse] can be used to directly update the
   Calendar upon value changes, if supported by both the Server and the
   Client.

   Most likely, the ALTO Cost Calendar would be used for the Endpoint
   Cost Service, assuming that a limited set of feasible Endpoints for a
   non-real time application is already identified, that they do not
   need to be accessed immediately and that their access can be
   scheduled within a given time period.  The Filtered Cost Map Service
   is also applicable as long as the size of the Map allows it.

3.2.  ALTO Cost Calendar information features

   The Calendar attributes are provided in the Information Resources
   Directory (IRD) and in ALTO Server responses.  The IRD announces
   attributes without date values in its information resources
   capabilities, whereas attributes with time dependent values are
   provided in the "meta" section of Server responses.  The ALTO Cost
   Calendar attributes provide the following information:

   o  attributes to describe the time scope of the Calendar value array:




Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


      *  "time-interval-size": the applicable time interval size for
         each Calendar value, defined in seconds, that can cover a wide
         range of values.

      *  "number-of-intervals": the number of intervals provided in the
         Calendar.

   o  "calendar-start-time": specifying when the Calendar starts, that
      is to which date the first value of the Cost Calendar is
      applicable.

   o  "repeated": an optional attribute indicating how many iterations
      of the provided Calendar will have the same values.  The Server
      may use it to allow the Client to schedule its next request and
      thus save its own workload by reducing processing of similar
      requests.

   Attribute "repeated" may take a very high value if a Calendar
   represents a cyclic value pattern that the Server considers valid for
   a long period.  In this case, the Server will only update the
   Calendar values once this period has elapsed or if an unexpected
   event occurs on the network.  See Section 8 for more discussion.

3.3.  ALTO Calendar design characteristics

   The present document uses the notations defined in Section "8.2
   Notation" of [RFC7285].

   The extensions in this document encode requests and responses using
   JSON [RFC8259].

   In the base protocol [RFC7285] section 11.2.3.6, an ALTO cost is
   specified as a generic JSONValue [RFC8259], to allow extensions.
   However, that section 11.2.3.6 states: "An implementation of the
   protocol in this document ([RFC7285]) SHOULD assume that the cost is
   a JSONNumber and fail to parse if it is not, unless the
   implementation is using an extension to this document that indicates
   when and how costs of other data types are signaled".

   The present document extends the definition of a legacy cost map
   given in [RFC7285] to allow a cost entry to be an array of values,
   with one value per time interval, instead of being just one number,
   when the Cost Calendar functionality is activated on this cost.
   Therefore the implementor of this extension MUST consider that a cost
   entry is an array of values if this cost has been queried as a
   Calendar.





Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   Specifically, an implementation of this extension MUST parse the
   "number-of-intervals" attribute of the Calendar attributes in an IRD
   entry announcing a service providing a Cost Calendar for a given cost
   type.  The implementation then will know that a cost entry of the
   service will be an array of values, and the expected size of the
   array is that specified by the "number-of-intervals" attribute.  The
   following rules attempt to ensure consistency between the array size
   announced by the Server and the actual size of the array received by
   the Client:

   o  The size of the array of values conveyed in a Cost Calendar and
      received by the Client MUST be equal to the value of attribute
      "number-of-intervals" indicated in the IRD for the requested cost
      type.

   o  When the size of the array received by the Client is different
      from the expected size, the Client SHOULD ignore the received
      array.

   To realize an ALTO Calendar, this document extends the IRD and the
   ALTO requests and responses for Cost Calendars.

   This extension is designed to be lightweight and to ensure backwards
   compatibility with base protocol ALTO Clients and with other
   extensions.  It relies on section 8.3.7 "Parsing of Unknown Fields"
   of [RFC7285] that writes: "Extensions may include additional fields
   within JSON objects defined in this document.  ALTO implementations
   MUST ignore unknown fields when processing ALTO messages."

   The Calendar-specific capabilities are integrated in the information
   resources of the IRD and in the "meta" member of ALTO responses to
   Cost Calendars requests.  A Calendar and its capabilities are
   associated with a given information resource and within this
   information resource, with a given cost type.  This design has
   several advantages:

   o  it does not introduce a new mode,

   o  it does not introduce new media types,

   o  it allows an ALTO Server to offer, for a cost type, different
      Calendars with attributes that are specific to the information
      resources providing a Calendar for this cost type, instead of
      being globally specific to the cost type.

   The applicable Calendared information resources are:

   o  the Filtered Cost Map,



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   o  the Endpoint Cost Map.

   The ALTO Server can choose in which frequency it provides cost
   Calendars to ALTO Clients.  It may either provide Calendar updates
   starting at the request date, or carefully schedule its updates so as
   to take profit from a potential repetition/periodicity of Calendar
   values.

   Since Calendar attributes are specific to an information resource, a
   Server may adapt the granularity of the calendared information so as
   to moderate the volume of exchanged data.  For example: suppose a
   Server provides a Calendar for cost type name "routingcost".  The
   Server may offer a Calendar in a Cost Map resource, which may be a
   voluminous resource, as an array of 6 intervals lasting each 4 hours.
   It may also offer a Calendar in an Endpoint Cost Map resource, which
   is potentially less voluminous, as a finer-grained array of 24
   intervals lasting 1 hour each.

   The ALTO Server does not support constraints on Calendars, provided
   Calendars are requested for numerical values, for two main reasons:

   o  constraints on an array of values may be various: for instance,
      some Clients may refuse Calendars with one single value violating
      a constraint, where as other ones may tolerate Calendars with
      values violating constraints for example at given times.
      Therefore, expressing constraints in a way that covers all
      possible Client preferences is challenging,

   o  if constraints were to be supported, the processing overhead would
      be substantial for the Server as it would have to parse alle the
      values of the Calendar array before returning a response.

   As providing the constraint functionality in conjunction with the
   Calendar functionality is not feasible for the reasons described
   above, the two features are mutually exclusive.  The absence of
   constraints on Filtered Cost Map and Endpoint Cost Map Calendars
   reflects a divergence from the non-calendared information resources
   defined in [RFC7285] and extended in [RFC8189], that support optional
   constraints.

3.3.1.  ALTO Cost Calendar for all cost modes

   An ALTO Cost Calendar is well-suited for values encoded in the
   "numerical" mode.  Actually, a Calendar can also represent metrics in
   other modes considered as compatible with time-varying values.  For
   example, types of Cost values such as JSONBool can also be
   calendared, as their value may be 'true' or 'false' depending on




Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   given time periods or likewise, values represented by strings, such
   as "medium", "high", "low", "blue", "open".

   Note also that a Calendar is suitable as well for time-varying
   metrics provided in the "ordinal" mode, if these values are time-
   varying and the ALTO Server provides updates of cost value based
   preferences.

3.3.2.  Compatibility with legacy ALTO Clients

   The ALTO protocol extensions for Cost Calendars have been defined so
   as to ensure that Calendar-capable ALTO Servers can provide legacy
   ALTO Clients with legacy information resources as well.  That is, a
   legacy ALTO Client can request resources and receive responses as
   specified in [RFC7285].

   A Calendar-aware ALTO Server MUST implement the base protocol
   specified in [RFC7285].

   A Calendar-aware ALTO Client MUST implement the base protocol
   specified in [RFC7285].

   As a consequence, when a metric is available as a Calendar array, it
   also MUST be available as a single value as required by [RFC7285].
   The Server, in this case, provides the current value of the metric to
   either Calendar-aware Clients not interested in future or time-based
   values, or Clients implementing [RFC7285] only.

   For compatibility with legacy ALTO Clients specified in [RFC7285],
   calendared information resources are not applicable for full cost
   maps for the following reason: a legacy ALTO Client would receive a
   calendared cost map via an HTTP 'GET' command.  As specified in
   section 8.3.7 of [RFC7285], it will ignore the Calendar Attributes
   indicated in the "meta" of the responses.  Therefore, lacking
   information on Calendar attributes, it will not be able to correctly
   interpret and process the values of the received array of Calendar
   cost values.

   Therefore, calendared information resources MUST be requested via the
   Filtered Cost Map Service or the Endpoint Cost Service, using a POST
   method.

4.  ALTO Calendar specification: IRD extensions

   The Calendar attributes in the IRD information resources capabilities
   carry dateless values.  A Calendar is associated with an information
   resource rather than a cost type.  For example, a Server can provide
   a "routingcost" Calendar for the Filtered Cost Map Service at a



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   granularity of one day and a "routingcost" Calendar for the Endpoint
   Cost Service at a finer granularity but for a limited number of
   endpoints.  An example IRD with Calendar specific features is
   provided in Section 4.3.

4.1.  Calendar attributes in the IRD resource capabilities

   A Cost Calendar for a given cost type MUST be indicated in the IRD by
   an object of type CalendarAttributes.  A CalendarAttributes object is
   represented by the "calendar-attributes" member of a resource entry.
   Member "calendar-attributes" is an array of CalendarAttributes
   objects.  Each CalendarAttributes object lists a set of one or more
   cost types it applies to.  A cost type name MUST NOT appear more than
   once in the "calendar-attributes" member of a resource entry;
   multiple appearances of a cost type name in the CalendarAttributes
   object of the "calendar-attributes" member MUST cause the ALTO Client
   to ignore any occurrences of this name beyond the first encountered
   occurrence.  The Client SHOULD consider the CalendarAttributes object
   in the array containing the first encountered occurrence of a cost
   type as the valid one for this cost type.  As an alternative, the
   Client may want to avoid the risks of erroneous guidance associated
   to the use of potentially invalid Calendar values.  In this case, the
   Client MAY ignore the totality of occurences of CalendarAttributes
   objects containing the cost type name and query the cost type using
   [RFC7285].

   The encoding format for object CalendarAttributes, using JSON
   [RFC8259], is as follows:

   CalendarAttributes calendar-attributes <1..*>;

   object{
     JSONString cost-type-names <1..*>;
     JSONNumber time-interval-size;
     JSONNumber number-of-intervals;
   } CalendarAttributes;

   o  "cost-type-names":

      *  An array of one or more elements indicating the cost type names
         in the IRD entry to which the values of "time-interval-size"
         and "number-of-intervals" apply.

   o  "time-interval-size":

      *  is the duration of an ALTO Calendar time interval in a unit of
         seconds.  A "time-interval-size" value contains a non-negative
         JSONNumber.  Example values are: 300 and 7200, meaning that



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


         each Calendar value applies on a time interval that lasts 5
         minutes and 2 hours, respectively.  Since an interval size
         (e.g., 100 ms) can be smaller than the unit, the value
         specified may be a floating point (e.g., 0.1).  Both ALTO
         Clients and Servers should be aware of potential precision
         issues caused by using floating point numbers; for example, the
         floating number 0.1 cannot be represented precisely using a
         finite number of binary bits.  To improve interoperability and
         be consistent with [RFC7285] on the use of floating point
         numbers, the Server and the Client SHOULD use IEEE 754 double-
         precision floating point [IEEE.754.2008] to store this value.

   o  "number-of-intervals":

      *  is a strictly positive integer (greater or equal to 1), that
         indicates the number of values of the Cost Calendar array.

   - An ALTO Server SHOULD specify the "time-interval-size" in the IRD
   as the smallest it is able to provide.  A Client that needs a longer
   interval can aggregate multiple cost values to obtain it.

   - Attribute "cost-type-names" is associated with "time-interval-size"
   and "number-of-intervals", because multiple cost types may share the
   same values for attributes "time-interval-size" and "number-of-
   intervals".  To avoid redundancies, cost type names sharing the same
   values for "time-interval-size" and "number-of-intervals" are grouped
   in the "cost-type-names" attribute.  In the example IRD provided in
   Section 4.3, the information resource "filtered-cost-map-calendar"
   provides a Calendar for cost type names "num-routingcost", "num-
   throughputrating" and "string-servicestatus".  Cost type names "num-
   routingcost" and "num-throughputrating" are grouped in the "cost-
   type-names" attribute because they share the same values for "time-
   interval-size" and "number-of-intervals", which are respectively 7200
   and 12.

   - Multiplying "time-interval-size" by "number-of-intervals" provides
   the duration of the provided Calendar.  For example, an ALTO Server
   may provide a Calendar for ALTO values changing every "time-interval-
   size" equal to 5 minutes.  If "number-of-intervals" has the value 12,
   then the duration of the provided Calendar is 1 hour.

4.2.  Calendars in a delegate IRD

   It may be useful to distinguish IRD resources supported by the base
   ALTO protocol from resources supported by its extensions.  To achieve
   this, one option, is that a "root" ALTO Server implementing [RFC7285]
   resources and running at a given domain, delegates "specialized"
   information resources such as the ones providing Cost Calendars, to



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   another ALTO Server running in a subdomain.  The "root" ALTO Server
   can provide a Calendar-specific resource entry, that has a media-type
   of "application/alto-directory+json" and that specifies the URI
   allowing to retrieve the location of a Calendar-aware Server and
   discover its resources.  This option is described in Section 9.2.4
   "Delegation using IRDs" of [RFC7285].

   This document provides an example, where a "root" ALTO Server runs in
   a domain called "alto.example.com".  It delegates the announcement of
   Calendars capabilities to an ALTO Server running in a subdomain
   called "custom.alto.example.com".  The location of the "delegate
   Calendar IRD" is assumed to be indicated in the "root" IRD by the
   resource entry: "custom-calendared-resources".

   Another benefit of delegation is that some cost types for some
   resources may be more advantageous as Cost Calendars and it makes
   little sense to get them as a single value.  For example, if a cost
   type has predictable and frequently changing values, calendared in
   short time intervals such as a minute, it saves time and network
   resources to track the cost values via a focused delegate Server
   rather than the more general "root" Server.

4.3.  Example IRD with ALTO Cost Calendars

   This section provides an example ALTO Server IRD that supports
   various cost metrics and cost modes.  In particular, since [RFC7285]
   makes it mandatory, the Server uses metric "routingcost" in the
   "numerical" mode.

   For illustrative purposes, this section introduces 3 other fictitious
   example metrics and modes that should be understood as examples and
   should not be used or considered as normative.

   The cost type names used in the example IRD are as follows:

   o  "num-routingcost": refers to metric "routingcost" in the numerical
      mode as defined in [RFC7285] and registered with IANA.

   o  "num-owdelay": refers to fictitious performance metric "owdelay"
      in the "numerical" mode, to reflect the one-way packet
      transmission delay on a path.  A related performance metric is
      currently under definition in [I-D.ietf-alto-performance-metrics].

   o  "num-throughputrating": refers to fictitious metric
      "throughputrating" in the "numerical" mode, to reflect the
      provider preference in terms of end to end throughput.





Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   o  "string-servicestatus": refers to fictitious metric
      "servicestatus" containing a string, to reflect the availability,
      defined by the provider, of for instance path connectivity.

   The example IRD includes 2 particular URIs providing Calendars:

   o  "https://custom.alto.example.com/calendar/costmap/filtered": a
      Filtered Cost Map in which Calendar capabilities are indicated for
      cost type names: "num-routingcost", "num-throughputrating" and
      "string-servicestatus",

   o  "https://custom.alto.example.com/calendar/endpointcost/lookup": an
      Endpoint Cost Map in which Calendar capabilities are indicated for
      cost type names: "num-routingcost", "num-owdelay", "num-
      throughputrating", "string-servicestatus".

   The design of the Calendar capabilities allows some Calendars with
   the same cost type name to be available in several information
   resources with different Calendar Attributes.  This is the case for
   Calendars on "num-routingcost", "num-throughputrating" and "string-
   servicestatus", available in both the Filtered Cost map and Endpoint
   Cost Service, but with different time interval sizes for "num-
   throughputrating" and "string-servicestatus".

   --- Client to Server request for IRD ----------

   GET /calendars-directory HTTP/1.1
   Host: custom.alto.example.com
   Accept: application/alto-directory+json,application/alto-error+json

   --- Server response to Client -----------------

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Length: 2622
   Content-Type: application/alto-directory+json

   {
     "meta" : {
       "default-alto-network-map" : "my-default-network-map",
       "cost-types": {
         "num-routingcost": {
           "cost-mode" : "numerical",
           "cost-metric" : "routingcost"
         },
         "num-owdelay": {
           "cost-mode"  : "numerical",
           "cost-metric": "owdelay"
         },



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


         "num-throughputrating": {
           "cost-mode"  : "numerical",
           "cost-metric": "throughputrating"
         },
         "string-servicestatus": {
           "cost-mode"  : "string",
           "cost-metric": "servicestatus"
         }
       }
     },
     "resources" : {
       "filtered-cost-map-calendar" : {
         "uri" :
           "https://custom.alto.example.com/calendar/costmap/filtered",
         "media-type" : "application/alto-costmap+json",
         "accepts" : "application/alto-costmapfilter+json",
         "capabilities" : {
           "cost-constraints" : true,
           "cost-type-names"  : [ "num-routingcost",
                                  "num-throughputrating",
                                  "string-servicestatus" ],
           "calendar-attributes" : [
             {"cost-type-names" : [ "num-routingcost",
                                    "num-throughputrating" ],
              "time-interval-size" : 7200,
              "number-of-intervals" : 12
             },
             {"cost-type-names" : [ "string-servicestatus" ],
              "time-interval-size" : 1800,
              "number-of-intervals" : 48
             }
           ]
         },
         "uses": [ "my-default-network-map" ]
       },
       "endpoint-cost-map-calendar" : {
         "uri" :
         "https://custom.alto.example.com/calendar/endpointcost/lookup",
         "media-type" : "application/alto-endpointcost+json",
         "accepts" : "application/alto-endpointcostparams+json",
         "capabilities" : {
           "cost-constraints" : true,
           "cost-type-names" : [ "num-routingcost",
                                 "num-owdelay",
                                 "num-throughputrating",
                                 "string-servicestatus" ],
           "calendar-attributes" : [
             {"cost-type-names" : [ "num-routingcost" ],



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


              "time-interval-size" : 3600,
              "number-of-intervals" : 24
             },
             {"cost-type-names" : [ "num-owdelay" ],
              "time-interval-size" : 300,
              "number-of-intervals" : 12
             },
             {"cost-type-names" : [ "num-throughputrating" ],
              "time-interval-size" : 60,
              "number-of-intervals" : 60
             },
             {"cost-type-names" : [ "string-servicestatus" ],
              "time-interval-size" : 120,
              "number-of-intervals" : 30
             }
           ]
         }
       }
     }
   }

   In this example IRD, for the Filtered Cost Map Service:

   o  the Calendar for "num-routingcost" and "num-throughputrating" is
      an array of 12 values each provided on a time interval lasting
      7200 seconds (2 hours).

   o  the Calendar for "string-servicestatus": "is an array of 48 values
      each provided on a time interval lasting 1800 seconds (30
      minutes).

   For the Endpoint Cost Service:

   o  the Calendar for "num-routingcost": is an array of 24 values each
      provided on a time interval lasting 3600 seconds (1 hour).

   o  the Calendar for "num-owdelay": is an array of 12 values each
      provided on a time interval lasting 300 seconds (5 minutes).

   o  the Calendar for "num-throughputrating": is an array of 60 values
      each provided on a time interval lasting 60 seconds (1 minute).

   o  the Calendar for "string-servicestatus": "is an array of 30 values
      each provided on a time interval lasting 120 seconds (2 minutes).

   Note that in this example IRD, member "cost-constraints" is present
   with a value set to "true" in both information resources "filtered-
   cost-map-calendar" and "endpoint-cost-map-calendar".  Although a



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   Calendar-aware ALTO Server does not support constraints for the
   reasons explained in section Section 3.3, it MUST support constraints
   on cost types that are not requested as Calendars but are requested
   as specified in [RFC7285] and [RFC8189].

5.  ALTO Calendar specification: Service Information Resources

   This section documents extensions to two basic ALTO information
   resources (Filtered Cost Maps and Endpoint Cost Service) to provide
   calendared information services for them.

   Both extensions return calendar start time (calendar-start-time, a
   point in time), which MUST be specified as an HTTP "Date" header
   field using the IMF-fixdate format specified in Section 7.1.1.1 of
   [RFC7231].  Note that the IMF-fixdate format uses "GMT", not "UTC",
   to designate the time zone, as in this example:

                    Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2019 08:12:31 GMT

5.1.  Calendar extensions for Filtered Cost Maps (FCM)

   A legacy ALTO Client requests and gets Filtered Cost Map responses as
   specified in [RFC7285].

5.1.1.  Calendar extensions in Filtered Cost Map requests

   The input parameters of a "legacy" request for a Filtered Cost Map,
   defined by object ReqFilteredCostMap in section 11.3.2 of [RFC7285],
   are augmented with one additional member.  The same augmentation
   applies to object ReqFilteredCostMap defined in section 4.1.2 of
   [RFC8189].

   A Calendar-aware ALTO Client requesting a Calendar on a given Cost
   Type for a Filtered Cost Map resource having Calendar capabilities
   MUST add the following field to its input parameters:

                          JSONBoolean calendared<1..*>;

   This field is an array of 1 to N boolean values, where N is the
   number of requested metrics.  N is greater than 1 when the Client and
   the Server also implement [RFC8189].

   Each entry corresponds to the requested metric at the same array
   position.  Each boolean value indicates whether or not the ALTO
   Server should provide the values for this cost type as a Calendar.
   The array MUST contain exactly N boolean values, otherwise, the
   Server returns an error.




Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   This field MUST NOT be included if no member "calendar-attributes" is
   specified in this information resource.

   If a value of field "calendared" is 'true' for a cost type name for
   which no Calendar attributes have been specified: an ALTO Server,
   whether it implements the extensions of this document or only
   implements [RFC7285], MUST ignore it and return a response with a
   single cost value as specified in [RFC7285].

   If this field is not present, it MUST be assumed to have only values
   equal to 'false'.

   A Calendar-aware ALTO Client that supports requests for only one cost
   type at a time and wants to request a Calendar MUST provide an array
   of 1 element:

                          "calendared" : [true],

   A Calendar-aware ALTO Client that supports requests for more than one
   cost types at a time, as specified in [RFC8189] MUST provide an array
   of N values set to 'true' or 'false', depending whether it wants the
   applicable cost type values as a single or calendared value.

5.1.2.  Calendar extensions in Filtered Cost Map responses

   In a calendared ALTO Filtered Cost Map, a cost value between a source
   and a destination is a JSON array of JSON values.  An ALTO Calendar
   values array has a number of values equal to the value of member
   "number-of-intervals" of the Calendar attributes that are indicated
   in the IRD.  These attributes will be conveyed as metadata in the
   Filtered Cost Map response.  Each element of the array is valid for
   the time-interval that matches its array position.

   The FCM response conveys metadata among which:

   o  some are not specific to Calendars and ensure compatibility with
      [RFC7285] and [RFC8189]

   o  some are specific to Calendars.

   The non Calendar-specific "meta" fields of a calendared Filtered Cost
   Map response MUST include at least:

   o  if the ALTO Client requests cost values for one cost type at a
      time only: the "meta" fields specified in [RFC7285] for these
      information service responses:

      *  "dependent-vtags ",



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 18]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


      *  "cost-type" field.

   o  if the ALTO Client implements the Multi-Cost ALTO extension
      specified in [RFC8189] and requests cost values for several cost
      types at a time: the "meta" fields specified in [RFC8189] for
      these information service responses:

      *  "dependent-vtags ",

      *  "cost-type" field with value set to '{}', for backwards
         compatibility with [RFC7285].

      *  "multi-cost-types" field.

   If the Client request does not provide member "calendared" or if it
   provides it with a value equal to 'false', for all the requested cost
   types, then the ALTO Server response is exactly as specified in
   [RFC7285] and [RFC8189].

   If the value of member "calendared" is equal to 'false' for a given
   requested cost type, the ALTO Server MUST return, for this cost type,
   a single cost value as specified in [RFC7285].

   If the value of member "calendared" is equal to 'true' for a given
   requested cost type, the ALTO Server returns, for this cost type, a
   cost value Calendar as specified above in this section.  In addition
   to the above cited non Calendar specific "meta" members, the Server
   MUST provide a Calendar specific metadata field.

   The Calendar-specific "meta" field that a calendared Filtered Cost
   Map response MUST include is a member called "calendar-response-
   attributes", that describes properties of the Calendar and where:

   o  member "calendar-response-attributes" is an array of one or more
      objects of type "CalendarResponseAttributes".

   o  each "CalendarResponseAttributes" object in the array is specified
      for one or more cost types for which the value of member
      "calendared", in object ReqFilteredCostMap provided in the Client
      request, is equal to 'true' and for which a Calendar is provided
      for the requested information resource.

   o  the "CalendarResponseAttributes" object that applies to a cost
      type name has a corresponding "CalendarAttributes" object defined
      for this cost type name in the IRD capabilities of the requested
      information resource.  This object is the entry, in the "calendar-
      attributes" array member of the IRD resource entry, that includes
      the name of the requested cost type.  This corresponding



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 19]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


      "CalendarAttributes" object has the same values as object
      "CalendarResponseAttributes" for members "time-interval-size" and
      "number-of-intervals".  The members of the
      "CalendarResponseAttributes" object include all the members of the
      corresponding "CalendarAttributes" object.

   The format of member "CalendarResponseAttributes is defined as
   follows:

   CalendarResponseAttributes calendar-response-attributes <1..*>;

   object{
     [JSONString cost-type-names <1..*>;]
     JSONString calendar-start-time;
     JSONNumber time-interval-size;
     JSONNumber number-of-intervals;
     [JSONNumber repeated;]
   } CalendarResponseAttributes;

   Object CalendarResponseAttributes has the following attributes:

   o  "cost-type-names": is an array of one or more cost-type-names to
      which the value of the other members of CalendarResponseAttributes
      apply and for which a Calendar has been requested.  The value of
      this member is a subset of the "cost-type-names" member of the
      abovementioned corresponding "CalendarAttributes" object in the
      "calendar-attributes" array member in the IRD.  This member MUST
      be present when Cost Calendars are provided for more than one cost
      type.

   o  "calendar-start-time": indicates the date at which the first value
      of the Calendar applies.  The value is a string that, as specified
      in Section 5, contains an HTTP "Date" header field using the IMF-
      fixdate format specified in Section 7.1.1.1 of [RFC7231].  The
      value provided for attribute "calendar-start-time" SHOULD NOT be
      later than the request date.

   o  "time-interval-size": as specified in Section 4.1 and with the
      same value as in the abovementioned corresponding
      "CalendarAttributes" object.

   o  "number-of-intervals": as specified in Section 4.1 and with the
      same value as in the abovementioned corresponding
      "CalendarAttributes" object.

   o  "repeated": is an optional field provided for Calendars.  It is an
      integer N greater or equal to '1' that indicates how many
      iterations of the Calendar value array starting at the date



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 20]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


      indicated by "calendar-start-time" have the same values.  The
      number N includes the iteration provided in the returned response.

   For example: suppose the "calendar-start-time" member has value "Mon,
   30 Jun 2019 00:00:00 GMT", the "time-interval-size" member has value
   '3600', the "number-of-intervals" member has value '24' and the value
   of member "repeated" is equal to '4'.  This means that the Calendar
   values are the same on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday on a
   period of 24 hours starting at 00:00:00 GMT.  The ALTO Client thus
   may use the same Calendar for the next 4 days starting at "calendar-
   start-time" and will only need to request a new one for Friday July
   4th at 00:00:00 GMT.

   Attribute "repeated" may take a very high value if a Calendar
   represents a cyclic value pattern that the Server considers valid for
   a long period and hence will only update once this period has elapsed
   or if an unexpected event occurs on the network.  In the latter case,
   the Client will be notified if it uses the "ALTO Incremental Updates
   Using Server-Sent Events (SSE)" Service, specified in
   [I-D.ietf-alto-incr-update-sse].  To this end, it is RECOMMENDED that
   ALTO Servers providing ALTO Calendars also provide the "ALTO
   Incremental Updates Using Server-Sent Events (SSE)" Service that is
   specified in [I-D.ietf-alto-incr-update-sse].  Likewise, ALTO Clients
   capable of using ALTO Calendars SHOULD also use the SSE Service.  See
   also discussion in Section 8 "Operational Considerations".

5.1.3.  Use case and example: FCM with a bandwidth Calendar

   An example of non-real-time information that can be provisioned in a
   Calendar is the expected path throughput.  While the transmission
   rate can be measured in real time by end systems, the operator of a
   data center is in the position of formulating preferences for given
   paths, at given time periods to avoid traffic peaks due to diurnal
   usage patterns.  In this example, we assume that an ALTO Client
   requests a Calendar of network-provider-defined throughput ratings,
   as specified in the IRD, to schedule its bulk data transfers as
   described in the use cases.

   In the example IRD, Calendars for cost type name "num-
   throughputrating" are available for the information resources:
   "filtered-cost-calendar-map" and "endpoint-cost-map-calendar".  The
   ALTO Client requests a Calendar for "num-throughputrating" via a POST
   request for a Filtered Cost Map.

   We suppose in the present example that the ALTO Client sends its
   request on Tuesday July 1st 2019 at 13:15.  The Server returns
   Calendars with arrays of 12 numbers for each source and destination




Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 21]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   pair.  The values for metric "throughputrating", in this example, are
   assumed to be encoded in 2 digits.

     POST /calendar/costmap/filtered HTTP/1.1
     Host: custom.alto.example.com
     Content-Length: 217
     Content-Type: application/alto-costmapfilter+json
     Accept: application/alto-costmap+json,application/alto-error+json

     {
       "cost-type" : {"cost-mode" : "numerical",
                      "cost-metric" : "throughputrating"},
       "calendared" : [true],
       "pids" : {
         "srcs" : [ "PID1", "PID2" ],
         "dsts" : [ "PID1", "PID2", "PID3" ]
       }
     }

     HTTP/1.1 200 OK
     Content-Length: 1043
     Content-Type: application/alto-costmap+json

     {
       "meta" : {
         "dependent-vtags" : [
           {"resource-id": "my-default-network-map",
            "tag": "3ee2cb7e8d63d9fab71b9b34cbf764436315542e"
           }
         ],
         "cost-type" : {"cost-mode" : "numerical",
                        "cost-metric" : "throughputrating"},
         "calendar-response-attributes" : [
           {"calendar-start-time" : "Tue, 1 Jul 2019 13:00:00 GMT",
            "time-interval-size" : 7200,
            "number-of-intervals" : 12}
         ]
       },
       "cost-map" : {
         "PID1": { "PID1": [ 1, 12, 14, 18, 14, 14,
                            14, 18, 19, 20, 11, 12],
                   "PID2": [13,  4, 15, 16, 17, 18,
                            19, 20, 11, 12, 13, 14],
                   "PID3": [20, 20, 18, 14, 12, 12,
                            14, 14, 12, 12, 14, 16] },
         "PID2": { "PID1": [17, 18, 19, 10, 11, 12,
                            13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18],
                   "PID2": [20, 20, 18, 16, 14, 14,



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 22]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


                            14, 16, 16, 16, 14, 16],
                   "PID3": [20, 20, 18, 14, 12, 12,
                            14, 14, 12, 12, 14, 16] }
       }
     }

5.2.  Calendar extensions in the Endpoint Cost Service

   This document extends the Endpoint Cost Service, as defined in
   {11.5.1} of [RFC7285], by adding new input parameters and
   capabilities, and by returning JSONArrays instead of JSONNumbers as
   the cost values.  The media type {11.5.1.1} and HTTP method
   {11.5.1.2} are unchanged.

5.2.1.  Calendar specific input in Endpoint Cost requests

   The extensions to the requests for calendared Endpoint Cost Maps are
   the same as for the Filtered Cost Map Service, specified in
   Section 5.1.1 of this document.  Likewise, the rules defined around
   the extensions to ECM requests are the same as those defined in
   Section 5.1.1 for FCM requests.

   The ReqEndpointCostMap object for a calendared ECM request will have
   the following format:

   object {
     [CostType cost-type;]
     [CostType multi-cost-types<1..*>;]
     [JSONBoolean calendared<1..*>;]
     EndpointFilter endpoints;
   } ReqEndpointCostMap;

   object {
     [TypedEndpointAddr srcs<0..*>;]
     [TypedEndpointAddr dsts<0..*>;]
   } EndpointFilter;

   Member "cost-type" is optional because, in the ReqEndpointCostMap
   object definition of this document, it is jointly present with member
   "multi-cost-types", to ensure compatibility with RFC 8189.  In
   RFC8189, members "cost-type" and "multi-cost-types" are both optional
   and have to obey the rule specified in section 4.1.2 of 8189 saying
   that: "the Client MUST specify either "cost-type" or "multi-cost-
   types" but MUST NOT specify both".

   The interpretation of member "calendared" is the same as for the
   ReqFilteredCostMap object defined in Section 5.1.1 of this document.
   The interpretation of the other members is the same as for object



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 23]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   ReqEndpointCostMap is defined in [RFC7285] and [RFC8189].  The type
   TypedEndpointAddr is defined in section 10.4.1 of [RFC7285].

   For the reasons explained in section Section 3.3, a Calendar-aware
   ALTO Server does not support constraints.  Therefore, member
   "[constraints]" is not present in the ReqEndpointCostMap object and
   member "constraints" MUST NOT be present in the input parameters of a
   request for an Endpoint Cost Calendar.  If this member is present,
   the Server MUST ignore it.

5.2.2.  Calendar attributes in the Endpoint Cost response

   The "meta" field of a calendared Endpoint Cost response MUST include
   at least:

   o  if the ALTO Client supports cost values for one cost type at a
      time only: the "meta" fields specified in {11.5.1.6} of [RFC7285]
      for the Endpoint Cost response:

      *  "cost-type" field.

   o  if the ALTO Client supports cost values for several cost types at
      a time, as specified in [RFC8189] : the "meta" fields specified in
      [RFC8189] for the the Endpoint Cost response:

      *  "cost-type" field with value set to '{}', for backwards
         compatibility with [RFC7285].

      *  "multi-cost-types" field.

   If the Client request does not provide member "calendared" or if it
   provides it with a value equal to 'false', for all the requested Cost
   Types, then the ALTO Server response is exactly as specified in
   [RFC7285] and [RFC8189].

   If the ALTO Client provides member "calendared" in the input
   parameters with a value equal to 'true' for given requested Cost
   Types, the "meta" member of a calendared Endpoint Cost response MUST
   include, for these cost types, an additional member "calendar-
   response-attributes", the contents of which obey the same rules as
   for the Filtered Cost Map Service, specified in Section 5.1.2.  The
   Server response is thus changed as follows, with respect to [RFC7285]
   and [RFC8189]:

   o  the "meta" member has one additional field
      "CalendarResponseAttributes", as specified for the Filtered Cost
      Map Service,




Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 24]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   o  the calendared costs are JSONArrays instead of the JSONNumbers
      format used by legacy ALTO implementations.  All arrays have a
      number of values equal to 'number-of-intervals'.  Each value
      corresponds to the cost in that interval.

   If the value of member "calendared" is equal to 'false' for a given
   requested cost type, the ALTO Server MUST return, for this cost type,
   a single cost value as specified in [RFC7285].

5.2.3.  Use case and example: ECS with a routingcost Calendar

   Let us assume an Application Client is located in an end system with
   limited resources and having access to the network that is either
   intermittent or provides an acceptable quality in limited but
   predictable time periods.  Therefore, it needs to schedule both its
   resource-greedy networking activities and its ALTO transactions.

   The Application Client has the choice to trade content or resources
   with a set of Endpoints and needs to decide with which one it will
   connect and at what time.  For instance, the Endpoints are spread in
   different time-zones, or have intermittent access.  In this example,
   the 'routingcost' is assumed to be time-varying, with values provided
   as ALTO Calendars.

   The ALTO Client associated with the Application Client queries an
   ALTO Calendar on 'routingcost' and will get the Calendar covering the
   24 hours time period "containing" the date and time of the ALTO
   Client request.

   For cost type "num-routingcost", the solicited ALTO Server has
   defined 3 different daily patterns each represented by a Calendar, to
   cover the week of Monday June 30th at 00:00 to Sunday July 6th 23:59:

   o  C1 for Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, (weekdays)

   o  C2 for Saturday, Sunday, (weekend)

   o  C3 for Friday (maintenance outage on July 4, 2019 from 02:00:00
      GMT to 04:00:00 GMT, or big holiday such as New Year evening).

   In the following example, the ALTO Client sends its request on
   Tuesday July 1st 2019 at 13:15.

   The "routingcost" values are assumed to be encoded in 3 digits.

  POST /calendar/endpointcost/lookup HTTP/1.1
  Host: custom.alto.example.com
  Content-Length: 304



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 25]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


  Content-Type: application/alto-endpointcostparams+json
  Accept: application/alto-endpointcost+json,application/alto-error+json

  {
    "cost-type" : {"cost-mode" : "numerical",
                   "cost-metric" : "routingcost"},
    "calendared" : [true],
    "endpoints" : {
      "srcs": [ "ipv4:192.0.2.2" ],
      "dsts": [
        "ipv4:192.0.2.89",
        "ipv4:198.51.100.34",
        "ipv4:203.0.113.45",
        "ipv6:2001:db8::10"
      ]
    }
  }

  HTTP/1.1 200 OK

  Content-Length: 1351
  Content-Type: application/alto-endpointcost+json

  {
    "meta" : {
      "cost-type" : {"cost-mode" : "numerical",
                     "cost-metric" : "routingcost"},
      "calendar-response-attributes" : [
        {"calendar-start-time" : "Mon, 30 Jun 2019 00:00:00 GMT",
         "time-interval-size" : 3600,
         "number-of-intervals" : 24,
         "repeated": 4
        }
      ]
    },
    "endpoint-cost-map" : {
      "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
        "ipv4:192.0.2.89"    : [100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 150,
                                200, 300, 300, 300, 300, 250,
                                250, 300, 300, 300, 300, 300,
                                400, 250, 250, 200, 150, 150],
        "ipv4:198.51.100.34" : [ 80,  80,  80,  80, 150, 150,
                                250, 400, 400, 450, 400, 200,
                                200, 350, 400, 400, 400, 350,
                                500, 200, 200, 200, 100, 100],
        "ipv4:203.0.113.45"  : [300, 400, 250, 250, 200, 150,
                                150, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100,
                                100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 150,



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 26]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


                                200, 300, 300, 300, 300, 250],
        "ipv6:2001:db8::10"  : [200, 250, 300, 300, 300, 300,
                                250, 300, 300, 300, 300, 350,
                                300, 400, 250, 150, 100, 100,
                                100, 150, 200, 250, 250, 300]
      }
    }
  }

   When the Client gets the Calendar for "routingcost", it sees that the
   "calendar-start-time" is Monday at 00h00 GMT and member "repeated" is
   equal to '4'.  It understands that the provided values are valid
   until Thursday included and will only need to get a Calendar update
   on Friday.

5.2.4.  Use case and example: ECS with a multi-cost Calendar for
        routingcost and owdelay

   In this example, it is assumed that the ALTO Server implements multi-
   cost capabilities, as specified in [RFC8189] . That is, an ALTO
   Client can request and receive values for several cost types in one
   single transaction.  An illustrating use case is a path selection
   done on the basis of 2 metrics: routing cost and owdelay.

   As in the previous example, the IRD indicates that the ALTO Server
   provides "routingcost" Calendars in terms of 24 time intervals of 1
   hour (3600 seconds) each.

   For metric "owdelay", the IRD indicates that the ALTO Server provides
   Calendars in terms of 12 time intervals values lasting each 5 minutes
   (300 seconds).

   In the following example transaction, the ALTO Client sends its
   request on Tuesday July 1st 2019 at 13:15.

   This example assumes that the values of metric "owdelay" and
   "routingcost" are encoded in 3 digits.

  POST calendar/endpointcost/lookup HTTP/1.1
  Host: custom.alto.example.com
  Content-Length: 390
  Content-Type: application/alto-endpointcostparams+json
  Accept: application/alto-endpointcost+json,application/alto-error+json

  {
    "cost-type" : {},
    "multi-cost-types" : [
      {"cost-mode" : "numerical", "cost-metric" : "routingcost"},



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 27]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


      {"cost-mode" : "numerical", "cost-metric" : "owdelay"}
    ],
    "calendared" : [true, true],
    "endpoints" : {
      "srcs": [ "ipv4:192.0.2.2" ],
      "dsts": [
        "ipv4:192.0.2.89",
        "ipv4:198.51.100.34",
        "ipv4:203.0.113.45",
        "ipv6:2001:db8::10"
      ]
    }
  }

  HTTP/1.1 200 OK
  Content-Length: 2165
  Content-Type: application/alto-endpointcost+json

  {
    "meta" : {
      "multi-cost-types" : [
        {"cost-mode" : "numerical", "cost-metric" : "routingcost"},
        {"cost-mode" : "numerical", "cost-metric" : "owdelay"}
      ],
      "calendar-response-attributes" : [
        {"cost-type-names" : [ "num-routingcost" ],
           "calendar-start-time" : "Mon, 30 Jun 2019 00:00:00 GMT",
           "time-interval-size" : 3600,
           "number-of-intervals" : 24,
           "repeated": 4 },
        {"cost-type-names" : [ "num-owdelay" ],
           "calendar-start-time" : "Tue, 1 Jul 2019 13:00:00 GMT",
           "time-interval-size" : 300,
           "number-of-intervals" : 12}
      ]
    },
    "endpoint-cost-map" : {
      "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
        "ipv4:192.0.2.89"    : [[100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 150,
                                 200, 300, 300, 300, 300, 250,
                                 250, 300, 300, 300, 300, 300,
                                 400, 250, 250, 200, 150, 150],
                                [ 20, 400,  20,  80,  80,  90,
                                 100,  90,  60,  40,  30,  20]],
        "ipv4:198.51.100.34" : [[ 80,  80,  80,  80, 150, 150,
                                 250, 400, 400, 450, 400, 200,
                                 200, 350, 400, 400, 400, 350,
                                 500, 200, 200, 200, 100, 100],



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 28]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


                                [ 20,  20,  50,  30,  30,  30,
                                  30,  40,  40,  30,  20,  20]],
        "ipv4:203.0.113.45"  : [[300, 400, 250, 250, 200, 150,
                                 150, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100,
                                 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 150,
                                 200, 300, 300, 300, 300, 250],
                                [100,  90,  80,  60,  50,  50,
                                  40,  40,  60,  90, 100,  80]],
        "ipv6:2001:db8::10"  : [[200, 250, 300, 300, 300, 300,
                                 250, 300, 300, 300, 300, 350,
                                 300, 400, 250, 150, 100, 100,
                                 100, 150, 200, 250, 250, 300],
                                [ 40,  40,  40,  40,  50,  50,
                                  50,  20,  10,  15,  30,  40]]
      }
    }
  }

   When receiving the response, the Client sees that the Calendar values
   for metric "routingcost" are repeated for 4 iterations.  Therefore,
   in its next requests until the "routingcost" Calendar is expected to
   change, the Client will only need to request a Calendar for
   "owdelay".

   Without the ALTO Calendar extensions, the ALTO Client would have no
   clue on the dynamicity of the metric value change and would spend
   needless time requesting values at an inappropriate pace.  In
   addition, without the Multi-Cost ALTO capabilities, the ALTO Client
   would duplicate this waste of time as it would need to send one
   request per cost metric.

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not define any new media types or introduce any
   new IANA considerations.

7.  Security Considerations

   As an extension of the base ALTO protocol [RFC7285], this document
   fits into the architecture of the base protocol, and hence the
   Security Considerations (Section 15) of [RFC7285] fully apply when
   this extension is provided by an ALTO Server.  For example, the same
   authenticity and integrity considerations (Section 15.1 of [RFC7285]
   still fully apply; the same considerations for the privacy of ALTO
   users (Section 15.4 of [RFC7285]) also still fully apply.

   The calendaring information provided by this extension requires
   additional considerations on three security considerations discussed



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 29]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   in [RFC7285]: potential undesirable guidance to Clients (Section 15.2
   of [RFC7285]), confidentiality of ALTO information (Section 15.2 of
   [RFC7285]), and availability of ALTO (Section 15.5 of [RFC7285]).
   For example, by providing network information in the future in a
   Calendar, this extension may improve availability of ALTO, when the
   ALTO Server is unavailable but related information is already
   provided in the Calendar.

   For confidentiality of ALTO information, an operator should be
   cognizant that this extension may introduce a new risk: a malicious
   ALTO Client may get information for future events that are scheduled
   through Calendaring.  Possessing such information, the malicious
   Client may use it to generate massive connections to the network at
   times where its load is expected to be high.

   To mitigate this risk, the operator should address the risk of ALTO
   information being leaked to malicious Clients or third parties.  As
   specified in Section 15.3.2 ("Protection Strategies") of [RFC7285],
   the ALTO Server should authenticate ALTO Clients and use the
   Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol so that Man In The Middle
   (MITM) attacks to intercept an ALTO Calendar are not possible.
   [RFC7285] ensures the availability of such a solution in its
   Section 8.3.5.  "Authentication and Encryption", which specifies
   that: "ALTO Server implementations as well as ALTO Client
   implementations MUST support the "https" URI scheme of [RFC2818] and
   Transport Layer Security (TLS) of [RFC5246]".

   [RFC8446] specifies TLS 1.3 and writes in its section 1: "While TLS
   1.3 is not directly compatible with previous versions, all versions
   of TLS incorporate a versioning mechanism which allows Clients and
   Servers to interoperably negotiate a common version if one is
   supported by both peers".  ALTO Clients and Servers SHOULD support
   both TLS 1.3 [RFC8446] and TLS 1.2 [RFC5246], and MAY support and use
   newer versions of TLS as long as the negotiation process succeeds.

   The operator should be cognizant that the preceding mechanisms do not
   address all security risks.  In particular, they will not help in the
   case of "malicious Clients" possessing valid authentication
   credentials.  The threat here is that legitimate Clients have become
   subverted by an attacker and are now 'bots' being asked to
   participate in a DDoS attack.  The Calendar information now becomes
   valuable in knowing exactly when to perpetrate a DDoS attack.  A
   mechanism such as a monitoring system that detects abnormal behaviors
   may still be needed.

   To avoid malicious or erroneous guidance from ALTO information, an
   ALTO Client should be cognizant that using calendaring information
   can have risks: (1) Calendar values, especially in "repeated"



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 30]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   Calendars may be only statistical, and (2) future events may change.
   Hence, a more robust ALTO Client should adapt and extend protection
   strategies specified in Section 15.2 of [RFC7285].  For example, to
   be notified immediately when a particular ALTO value that the Client
   depends on changes, it is RECOMMENDED that both the ALTO Client and
   ALTO Server using this extension support "ALTO Incremental Updates
   Using Server-Sent Events(SSE)" Service
   [I-D.ietf-alto-incr-update-sse].

   Another risk of erroneous guidance appears when the Server exposes an
   occurrence of a same cost type name in different elements of the
   Calendar objects array associated to an information resource.  In
   this case, there is no way for the Client to figure out which
   Calendar object in the array is valid.  The specification in this
   document recommends, in this case, that the Client uses the first
   encountered Calendar object occurrence containing the cost type name.
   However, the Client may want to avoid the risks of erroneous guidance
   associated to the use of potentially invalid Calendar values.  To
   this end, as an alternative to the recommendation in this document,
   the Client MAY ignore the totality of occurences of
   CalendarAttributes objects containing the cost type name and query
   this cost type using [RFC7285].

8.  Operational Considerations

   It is important that both the operator of the network and the
   operator of the applications consider both the feedback aspect and
   the prediction-based (uncertainty) aspect of using the Cost Calendar.

   First consider the feedback aspect and consider the Cost Calendar as
   a traffic-aware map service (e.g., Google Maps).  Using the service
   without considering its own effect, a large fleet can turn a not-
   congested road into a congested one; a large number of individual
   cars each choosing a road with light traffic ("cheap link") can also
   result in congestion or result in a less optimal global outcome
   (e.g., the Braess' Paradox [Braess-paradox]).

   Next consider the prediction aspect.  Conveying ALTO Cost Calendars
   tends to reduce the on-the-wire data exchange volume compared to
   multiple single cost ALTO transactions.  An application using
   Calendars has a set of time-dependent values upon which it can plan
   its connections in advance with no need for the ALTO Client to query
   information at each time.  Additionally, the Calendar response
   attribute "repeated", when provided, saves additional data exchanges
   in that it indicates that the ALTO Client does not need to query
   Calendars during a period indicated by this attribute.  The preceding
   is true only when "accidents" do not happen.




Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 31]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   Although individual network operators and application operators can
   choose their own approaches to address the aforementioned issues,
   this document recommends the following considerations.  First, a
   typical approach to reducing instability and handling uncertainty is
   to ensure timely update of information.  The SSE Service as discussed
   in Section 7 can handle updates, if supported by both the Server and
   the Client.  Second, when a network operator updates the Cost
   Calendar and when an application reacts to the update, they should
   consider the feedback effects.  This is the best approach even though
   there is theoretical analysis [Selfish-routing-Roughgarden-thesis]
   and Internet based evaluation [Selfish-routing-Internet-eval] showing
   that uncoordinated behaviors do not always cause substantial sub-
   optimal results.

   High-resolution intervals may be needed when values change, sometimes
   during very small time intervals but in a significant manner.  A way
   to avoid conveying too many entries is to leverage on the "repeated"
   feature.  A Server can smartly set the Calendar start time and number
   of intervals so as to declare them "repeated" for a large number of
   periods, until the Calendar values change and are conveyed to
   requesting Clients.

   The newer JSON Data Interchange Format specification [RFC8259] used
   in ALTO Calendars replaces the older one [RFC7159] used in the base
   ALTO protocol [RFC7285].  The newer JSON mandates UTF-8 text encoding
   to improve interoperability.  Therefore, ALTO Clients and Servers
   implementations using UTF-{16,32} need to be cognizant of the
   subsequent interoperability risks and MUST switch to UTF-8 encoding,
   if they want to interoperate with Calendar-aware Servers and Clients.

9.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Fred Baker, Li Geng, Diego Lopez, He
   Peng and Haibin Song for fruitful discussions and feedback on earlier
   draft versions.  Dawn Chan, Kai Gao, Vijay Gurbani, Yichen Qian,
   Juergen Schoenwaelder, and Brian Weis and Jensen Zhang provided
   substantial review feedback and suggestions to the protocol design.

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.





Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 32]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   [RFC7231]  Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
              Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7231>.

   [RFC7285]  Alimi, R., Ed., Penno, R., Ed., Yang, Y., Ed., Kiesel, S.,
              Previdi, S., Roome, W., Shalunov, S., and R. Woundy,
              "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol",
              RFC 7285, DOI 10.17487/RFC7285, September 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7285>.

   [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>.

   [RFC8189]  Randriamasy, S., Roome, W., and N. Schwan, "Multi-Cost
              Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO)", RFC 8189,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8189, October 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8189>.

   [RFC8259]  Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
              Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.

   [RFC5246]  Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
              (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>.

   [RFC8446]  Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.

   [I-D.ietf-alto-incr-update-sse]
              Roome, W. and Y. Yang, "ALTO Incremental Updates Using
              Server-Sent Events (SSE)", draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-
              sse-20 (work in progress), February 2020.

   [IEEE.754.2008]
              "Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic, IEEE
              Standard 754", August 2008.

10.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2818]  Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2818, May 2000,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2818>.



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 33]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   [RFC5693]  Seedorf, J. and E. Burger, "Application-Layer Traffic
              Optimization (ALTO) Problem Statement", RFC 5693,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5693, October 2009,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5693>.

   [RFC6708]  Kiesel, S., Ed., Previdi, S., Stiemerling, M., Woundy, R.,
              and Y. Yang, "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization
              (ALTO) Requirements", RFC 6708, DOI 10.17487/RFC6708,
              September 2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6708>.

   [RFC7159]  Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
              Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March
              2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>.

   [I-D.ietf-alto-performance-metrics]
              WU, Q., Yang, Y., Dhody, D., Randriamasy, S., and L.
              Contreras, "ALTO Performance Cost Metrics", draft-ietf-
              alto-performance-metrics-09 (work in progress), March
              2020.

   [I-D.xiang-alto-multidomain-analytics]
              Xiang, Q., Zhang, J., Le, F., Yang, Y., and H. Newman,
              "Resource Orchestration for Multi-Domain, Exascale, Geo-
              Distributed Data Analytics", draft-xiang-alto-multidomain-
              analytics-03 (work in progress), March 2020.

   [SENSE-sdn-e2e-net]
              "SDN for End-to-End Networked Science at the Exascale
              (SENSE), http://sense.es.net/overview".

   [Braess-paradox]
              Steinberg, R. and W. Zangwill, "The Prevalence of Braess'
              Paradox", Transportation Science Vol. 17 No. 3, August
              1983.

   [Unicorn-fgcs]
              Xiang, Q., Wang, T., Zhang, J., Newman, H., and Y. Liu,
              "Unicorn: Unified resource orchestration for multi-domain,
              geo-distributed data analytics", Future Generation of
              Computer Systems (FGCS) Volume 93, Pages 188-197, April
              2019.

   [Selfish-routing-Roughgarden-thesis]
              Roughgarden, T., "Selfish Routing", Dissertation Thesis,
              Cornell 2002, May 2002.






Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 34]


Internet-Draft             ALTO Cost Calendar                 March 2020


   [Selfish-routing-Internet-eval]
              Qiu, L., Yang, Y., Zhang, Y., and S. Shenker, "Selfish
              Routing in Internet-LIke Environments", Proceedings of ACM
              SIGCOMM 2001, August 2001.

Authors' Addresses

   Sabine Randriamasy
   Nokia Bell Labs
   Route de Villejust
   NOZAY  91460
   FRANCE

   Email: Sabine.Randriamasy@nokia-bell-labs.com


   Richard Yang
   Yale University
   51 Prospect st
   New Haven, CT  06520
   USA

   Email: yry@cs.yale.edu


   Qin Wu
   Huawei
   101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
   Nanjing, Jiangsu  210012
   China

   Email: sunseawq@huawei.com


   Lingli Deng
   China Mobile
   China

   Email: denglingli@chinamobile.com


   Nico Schwan
   Thales Deutschland
   Lorenzstrasse 10
   Stuttgart  70435
   Germany

   Email: nico.schwan@thalesgroup.com



Randriamasy, et al.    Expires September 18, 2020              [Page 35]