Minutes IETF101: alto
minutes-101-alto-00

------------- Monday, March 19, 2018 (GMT)
15:50-17:20     Monday Afternoon session II
-3E Palace C    tsv     alto    Application-Layer Traffic Optimization

13 participants Meetecho
20 parts        in room

Chair: Jan Seedorf

Note takers: Sabine, Richard
SLIDES: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/materials/ => TSV Transport Area /
alto

ACRONYMS:
BT      Brian Trammel
DC      Dawn Chen
JS      Jan Seedorf
JP      Jon Peterson
PANRG   Path Aware Networking RG
PV      Path vector
RY      Richard Yang
SL      Shawn Lin
TAPS    Transport Services WG
UP      Unified Properties
VG      Vijay Gurbani

---------- Status of WG: by Jan Seedorf WG Chair
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-chair-slides-ietf-101-00

We need to focus on WG items.
- RFC8189 on Multi-Cost published, congrats.
- Cross Domain Server Discovery: should move. Chairs think ready for WGLC
- ALTO Calendar WGLC is over and the draft will move to the ADs.
- ALTO Performance Metrics: is under review from other expert upon Mirja's
recommendation - CDNI FCI with ALTO: needs more work to get ready for WGLC -
SSE: is close to WGLC - Path Vector and Unified Properties: move now as a
bundle. Cell addresses will be added later on.

---------- "Path Aware Networking Research Group" by Brian Trammel PANRG chair
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-overlap-with-panrg-00

Brian exposes overlaps between PANRG and ALTO. PANRG meeting takes place on
Tuesday. - Why PANRG? PAN expands multi-path transport beyond
multi-connectivity; looks at alternatives on the current not path-aware
Internet architecture for routing and trustful routing information; want to
experiment cooperative signalling, how to tell what you want from the network.
- Relation to ALTO: ALTO addresses 2 top PANRG questions: (1) "how define and
represent path properties?" where path selection properties are being proposed
in the TAPS architecture. (2) "How give EPs access to trustworthy information 
about path properties?" - PANRG also has science fiction questions (see slides)

Discussion
- Vijay on meetecho: are there real measurements on how devices used in
multi-paths or academic papers? BT: question for people having larger scale
deployments, "ask Apple" question. 3 or 4 groups have studied this. - BT:
invites ALTO people to attend the PANRG session - RY: do you assume path fixed
or that you get properties helping to compute it? BT: is another control loop,
we don't assume path is fixed, good question, we need to have control loops
(network traffic engineering and endpoints trying to see where to send its
traffic) talking to each other and convergence; this is an engineering pb we
need address. - Raphael univ campenas.: there is also a network slicing group,
are u going talk to them on this? BT: I don't know yet what they do, net
slicing is a very large topic, they have a smaller focus, but I think we will.

---------- WG draft Unified Properties for the ALTO Protocol: presented by Dawn
Chen
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-unified-properties-00

Discussion
- chair JS: like approach (of defining new domains in other drafts), we want to
move this work forward. - DC on ALTO Entity Domain (AED) registry: ID is the
same (than ALTO Address Type (AAT) registry), address encoding is the same and
AED registry allows prefixes. Consistency can be set automatically or manually
with specified relationships. - JS: question on auto consistency: if new domain
that does not match with IP address, you can create dummy domain with whatever
address or the other way round? RY: In the current design we want everything
with an address to be in a domain. The problem is in the other way round, for
example a PID or   ANE has no traditional address type. JS: so what do the
authors prefer? comments in the room? RY: we try to go for mutual consistency
and look at guidance from IETF WGs or IESG? What's the process? Question is
automatic or manual? JS: I have no answer for the moment. How do we move fwd?
Choose manual and see what the IESG feedback is? RY: good idea JS: no strong
opinion against in room. To move fwd why not do that? Sebastian Kiesel on
meetecho: do you mean update RFC 7285? RY: we no change base protocol. It only
has AAT registry. AED registry doesn't touch base protocol. DC: we only address
relations between AAT and AED registries. Vijay on meetecho: we probably need
speak to AD. 2 issues: what makes sense technically? what is the AD and IANA
view? JS: we need to see feedback ahead of time and clarify Sebastian: in other
words if I don't care about the UP draft and want register new address type in
7285 do I need to care? JS and DC: you don't have to care Kai Gao: you care
about UP when you want yo use property pmaps. JS: good progress, so we have
still 1 outstanding issue on which we need clarify in following weeks with
IANA, AD, and Vijay and list discussions. JS: this document is otherwise well
polished

---------- WG draft ALTO extension Path Vector: presented by Dawn Chen
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-path-vector-00

Many edits and clarification on use case. New ANE domain moved from Unified
Properties. Main issue: coupling PV cost map and properties of elements
returned in the PV response. Different from relations between cost map and
network map. We need directions (on PV Cost Map and ANE property map
(in)dependency).

Discussion
- RY comment: we have a solution and look for decisions
- JS: you prefer one?
- RY: we look for WG expertise and will send e-mail around. Currently we go
along for independance, where objects can live by themselves and are composed
in "multipart". In YANG there is an option for this but this breaks the
protocol. RY: also we removed ANE from Unified Properties because no dependency
between both. - JS: as chair I support that. We need solve this issue. We are
pretty close to WGLC besides this.

---------- WG draft ALTO incremental updates using SSE: presented by Richard
Yang
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-incremental-updates-using-sse-02

Design stable. Lots of re-wording revisions. 1 Use Case across whole doc. For
example "update stream" concept, "update message" conveying data update full vs
piecewise change. Guidance on data update choices. - JS: like the word
"stream", is clearer. RY: we need WG feedback on server response to Client
requesting "removal".

Discussion
- Jon P: we sure need ask an http expert.
- JS: very close to WGLC

---------- WG draft CDNI footprint and capabilities advertisement using ALTO:
Shawn Lin remotely
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-cdni-request-routing-00

CDNI FCI ALTO service is now CDNI FCI Map. Added IANA considerations: Footprint
type registry,  new AED registry entries: ASN and Country Code, FCI property
registry. - JS as co-author: we introduce new map and need update error
handling vs base protocol. - SL: we look for WG feedback and would like to go
to WGLC

Discussion:
- JS: as co-author, I see no major issues from WG. Not that close from WGLC
though.

---------- ALTO Cell addresses: presented by Sabine Randriamasy
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-cellular-address-in-alto-00
Proposed as a separate draft but is one case raising discussion on relations
between AED and AAT registries in the UP draft. Presentation focuses on that.
Cell addreses aloow expanding beyond IP towards 5G.

Discussion:
- RY: there is a web site where you can look up where AED and AAT are
registered. Is that the question? - SR: issue is that WG docs specify how you
define information services and use it. But we miss something indicating to
people the existence of a given type. For ex. when reading UP, how can I find
out there exists something like ANE? - RY: maybe some kind of reverse index

---------- ALTO supported multi-domain orchestration : presented by Danny
Lachos Perez
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-based-broker-assisted-multi-domain-orchestration-02
"ALTO-based Broker-assisted Multi-domain Orchestration - 00"

This is new work. 5G scenarios need multi-domain orchestrators. Property map
and filtered cost map extension.

Discussion:
- RY : cool. We have related work, CPU prop. For CPUs they (large operators)
get confused if different providers have different prop values, we will discuss
this offline - Xian meetecho: given Src-Dest pairs, why need to discover all
possible paths between them? is it to ctrl the path? Danny: you need to retruen
all possible AS path between S and D.

---------- Unicorn updates: presented by Jensen Zhang
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-unicorn-resource-orchestration-for-data-analytics-00
"ALTO Use Case: Resource Orchestration for Multi-Domain, Geo-Distributed Data
Analytics"

Jensen presents updates on this work. There was a demo at SuperComputing'17 in
November. Added extended support to interdomain privacy. Summary: would like to
add this document as a use case to the WG charter

Discussion
-JS: you obviously put a lot of effort in this doc. it is not a WG charter
right now, we need see how to move this fwd.

---------- Flow-based Cost Query: presented by Jensen
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-alto-flow-based-cost-query-00

Removed advanced flow-based query. Issues: how to achieve unified query model?
how to resolve flow attribute conflicts? Next steps: get WG feedback, move to
WG item

Discussion
- JS: WG item not at this time, we need finish with the milestones ans see what
happens with the WG after. I see there is lot of interest in new work.

---------- Routing State Abstraction: presented by Kai Gao
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-alto-draft-gao-alto-routing-state-abstraction-00
Algos for ALTO path vector compression. Concrete implem of PV extension, useful
for compression and privacy. Summary: target = informational track, next steps:
adopt as WG doc, get WG feedback

Discussion
- JS: as chair I see usefulness for compression of PV. We need to see if we
re-charter the group or not. Agree with Mirja to finish with the WG items. If
we re-charter this is a possible WG item.

---------- Chair wrap-up
JS: I'm happy we did all the presentations, giving good view of the WG status.
Vijay is looking fwd to meeting in Montreal.