Content Distribution Network Interconnection (CDNI) Logging Interface
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "IETF-Announce" <email@example.com> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, "Kevin J. Ma" <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, "The IESG" <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: Protocol Action: 'CDNI Logging Interface' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-cdni-logging-27.txt) The IESG has approved the following document: - 'CDNI Logging Interface' (draft-ietf-cdni-logging-27.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Content Delivery Networks Interconnection Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Alexey Melnikov, Ben Campbell, Alissa Cooper and Spencer Dawkins. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cdni-logging/
Technical Summary This memo specifies the Logging interface between a downstream CDN (dCDN) and an upstream CDN (uCDN) that are interconnected as per the CDN Interconnection (CDNI) framework. First, it describes a reference model for CDNI logging. Then, it specifies the CDNI Logging File format and the actual protocol for exchange of CDNI Logging Files. Working Group Summary We had a lot of discussion regarding the security of the logging files, specifically as it relates to non-repudiation. Originally, the logging draft had text regarding non-repudiation, but later we determined non-repudiation was not as mature of a solution relative the rest of the logging draft and there was other work regarding non-repudiation occurring in the IETF. We decided to remove all references to non-repudiation for the following reasons: 1) Avoid the potential of defining anything for non-repudiation within CDNi and creating a conflict with other IETF work; 2) the requirement for non-repudiation was not a critical requirement for the logging draft. Recently, we had discussion and debate over which drafts should define the advertisement of capabilities (I.e., what logging fields are required to be supported). This was specifically related to the Footprint and Capabilities Interface (FCI) draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-04). Ideally, capability advertisement would be defined with the interfaces themselves, but the FCI draft is not as mature as this (and other drafts). As a result of vigorous discussion, we decided to remove a placeholder for the FCI advertisement information from the logging draft. In the future, the FCI draft will define the template for FCI objects and a registry for FCI objects. We will publish a separate RFC for capability advertisement for the logging interface. We determined this approach as the best trade-off between draft publish expediency and necessary functionality. Document Quality CDNI interfaces are still mostly in prototypes with plans for production support. Vendors, such as Cisco and Alcatel-Lucent, continue to progress the development and testing of the CDNI solution space, including the logging draft. Due to the Ops nature of this draft, we requested and received a thorough review from an expert in this area, David Harrington. We discussed and included necessary changes based on this review. Personnel Daryl Malas (co-chair of CDNI) is the document shepherd, and Spencer Dawkins is the responsible Area Director.