[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07

ALTO Working Group                                               L. Deng
INTERNET-DRAFT                                              China Mobile
Intended Status: Standard Track                                  H. Song
Expires: June 18, 2015                                            Huawei
                                                               S. Kiesel
                                                 University of Stuttgart
                                                                 R. Yang
                                                                    Yale
                                                                   Q. Wu
                                                                  Huawei
                                                       November 17, 2014


Extended End Point Properties for Application-Layer Traffic Optimization
                       draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext-05

Abstract

   The purpose of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO)
   protocol is to provide better-than-random peer selection for P2P
   networks. The base ALTO protocol focuses, only on providing network
   topological location information (i.e., network maps and cost maps).
   However, the peer selection method of an endpoint may also use other
   properties, such as geographic location. This document defines a
   framework and an extended set of End Point properties (EP properties)
   to extend the base ALTO protocol.

Status of this Memo

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

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as
   Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html




Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 1

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


Copyright and License Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors. All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document. Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document. 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1. Guidelines and Methodology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.2. Information flow  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.3. Privacy considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       3.3.1. Privacy-Preserving Information Mapping  . . . . . . . .  6
       3.2.2. Access Control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.4. Relation with other properties  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  Endpoint Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.1. Location-Related Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.1. Endpoint Property Type: geolocation . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.2. Node-related properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.2.1. End Point Property Type: participating_role . . . . . .  9
       4.2.2. End Point Property Type: battery_limited  . . . . . . . 10
       4.2.3. End Point Property Type: local_capacity . . . . . . . . 10
     4.3. Network-Related Properties  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       4.3.1. End Point Property Type: network_access . . . . . . . . 11
       4.3.2. End Point Property Type: forwarding_class . . . . . . . 13
     4.4. Subscription-Related Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       4.4.1. End Point Property Type: volume_limited . . . . . . . . 14
       4.4.2. End Point Property Type: provisioned_bandwidth  . . . . 14
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   6.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     7.2. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 2

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014





















































Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 3

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


1.  Introduction

   The initial purpose for Application Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO)
   protocol [RFC7285] is to provide better than random peer selection
   for Peer-to-Peer (P2P) networks. It is expected that ALTO can be used
   in serving a variety of applications and therefore it should be able
   to provide richer information in terms of End Point properties.

   In this document, more EP property extensions are defined to provide
   guidance for both P2P and other applications in terms of end point
   selection.


2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

   This document makes use of the ALTO terminology defined in RFC 5693
   [RFC5693].

   TBA.

3.  Overview

   It is expected that EP properties reflecting the following list of
   information can be useful for an ALTO client to provide better user
   experience or avoid performance degradation:

   o location-related information, the information about the geographic
   location of the end point.

   o node-related information, the information about the end point's
   local features, such as software/hardware configuration and the
   participating role of the end point (e.g. as a end user, or a CDN
   server, or a P2P cache, etc.).

   o network-related information, the information about the attached
   network of the end point, such as the type or configuration of the
   access network (e.g. 2G/3G/4G, WLAN, DSL, etc.) and the information
   about the network topology (e.g. ASN, Rack-id, etc.).

   o subscription-related information, the information about the service
   provision agreement between the end point's owner (i.e. the
   subscriber) and the network provider.

3.1. Guidelines and Methodology



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 4

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   The most basic principle would be to maintain the EP property set to
   a minimum, which in turn implies two guidelines: non-redundancy and
   generality.

   o Non-redundancy, refers to the guideline that there is no complete
   coverage between any two properties.

   o Generality, refers to the guideline that each property should be
   generally applicable to a group of settings. It is not economic to
   define a property which is bounded to a single type of application or
   a single deployment scenario.

   In order to make sure that the properties as defined in this document
   fulfill the above principle and guidelines, we intend to justify each
   property's definition using the following methodology:

   o Usefulness: there should be a clear motivation and application
   scenarios that justify the necessity and value for providing such
   information via EP property enquiry.

   o Non-redundancy: avoid adding a property whose value can be implied
   by an already defined property or any combination of them. It may be
   of interest to keep the discussion and suggestions on how to acquire
   such information via from other already defined EP properties in the
   document.

   o Case-independency: when designing the concrete information model
   for the properties, it is suggested to group application/deployment
   specific information into more general property definitions (with
   different value for different applications/scenarios) whenever
   possible.


3.2. Information flow

   On the one hand, the same piece of information about a group of
   candidate endpoints may be acquired by an application in two ways:
   directly through one-to-many communication of application-specific
   message exchange with each candidate for flexibility, or indirectly
   via one-to-one transaction with the ALTO server for efficiency.

   On the other hand, EP properties as defined in this document may as
   well be retrieved and aggregated into the ALTO server in two ways.
   One is from the endpoint itself, and the other is from the service
   provider which provides network service to the end point.

   Note: There is currently no standardized mechanism by which a peer
   could publish information about itself into an ALTO server.



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 5

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   Therefore, it is to be decided whether or not if we should include EP
   properties in this document if their acquisition requires an
   extension to the base protocol for an endpoint to publish its
   information directly to the ALTO server.

   An endpoint can discover the ALTO server with ALTO discovery
   mechanisms, and then setup a communication channel with its ALTO
   server. After that the endpoint property from the endpoint itself can
   be reported.

   The ALTO server can also be configured to access the Network
   Management System server or other similar servers provided by the
   network service provider for information about end points, such as
   subscription related information.

3.3. Privacy considerations

   Privacy considerations is a general concern for almost all EP
   properties, as they are by definition more stationary information
   regarding a specific end point.

   However, each end point may have different concerns or sensitive
   preference over a specific EP property. For example, endpoint
   property regarding the service role of the endpoint, serving nodes
   deployed by the ISP or third party service provider, such like P2P
   caching server, or CDN node, may have different considerations over
   whether a piece of information is private or not. Therefore, it may
   be necessary to provide a mechanism to accommodate this type of
   individual customization by providing a channel for an end point to
   explicitly indicate this information based on its own preference.

   More general, it is expected that the privacy level of a specific EP
   property is dependent on the nature of the information (i.e. the EP
   property), the type of the subscriber (i.e. the user who owns the end
   point in question), the type of the application (i.e. the ALTO client
   who is requesting the EP property) and the policy of the ISP (i.e.
   the owner of the ALTO server who is able to do information collection
   from the end points and determine how the the information is exposed
   to the requesting application).

   Fortunately, there are generally applicable schemes to be used to
   address the privacy protection concerns, which may be applicable to a
   group of EP properties and can be configured by the ISP or the EP
   subscriber. In this section, several general schemes are introduced,
   whose application to each EP property is elaborated later in
   following sections.

3.3.1. Privacy-Preserving Information Mapping



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 6

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   On the one hand, the privacy concern is unnecessary if the specific
   endpoint property can also be measured/disclosed in another way. The
   privacy concern regarding to the accurate information of the endpoint
   would be alleviated if using relative numbers to rank them. For
   deployment considerations, it is also possible for each endpoint to
   make the choice whether to disclose the relative information or not,
   but an incentive could be used to encourage the disclosure when it is
   beneficial to the application.

   In other words, in order to preserve the privacy of a piece of
   information, different data types can be defined via information
   mapping. In particular, in this document, each property is defined as
   a JSON object [RFC4627], which contains a dynamic typing attribute
   "content" as well as two deterministic attributes, "name" and
   "precision".

   The "name" attribute is a string, whose value is the name of the
   property. The "precision" attribute is also a string, whose value
   comes from an attribute-dependent set. Depending on the value of the
   property's "precision" attribute, its "content" attribute can be a
   string, number, boolean or another object.

   In this document, in order to define an EP property as a JSON object,
   we specify:

        o the string value of its "name" attribute;
        o the value set of its "precision" attribute; and
        o the definitions of its "content" attribute for each "precision".


   A special string value "" for "precision" attribute is used to
   indicate that an EP property, which is not privacy sensitive or using
   information mapping, has no precision-dynamic "content" definition.

3.2.2. Access Control

   On the other hand, access control to sensitive property information
   may also be used to mitigate the privacy concern of a defined
   property. Even greater flexibility can be delivered by access control
   at the discretion of both the network operator and the individual
   subscriber, which is deployment specific and out of scope for the
   general discussion within this document.


3.4. Relation with other properties

   Endpoint information can be extremely dynamic or relatively static.
   Currently, this specification does not intend to provide any real-



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 7

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   time properties such as the available bandwidth from the endpoint [I-
   D.draft-wu-alto-te-metrics], whose value is subject to frequent
   changes and hence requires a measurement-based exposure scheme.

   The basic end point properties as defined in this document, serves as
   a basis for the property namespace to be used to derive PID
   properties [I-D.draft-roome-alto-pid-properties] for the
   corresponding peer group, when the direct enquiry for the information
   per end point is not efficient or economic for the ALTO client.



4.  Endpoint Extensions

   This document defines new endpoint property types for the ALTO
   protocol [RFC 7285].

4.1. Location-Related Properties

4.1.1. Endpoint Property Type: geolocation

   It is believed that the information about an individual endpoint's
   geo-location is of value to a variety of applications. However, it is
   also well accepted that geolocation of an endpoint is likely to be
   considered as a private piece of information to the subscriber, and
   therefore should be protected against undesirable privacy intrusion.

   To this end, an EP property is defined as a JSON object, with the
   name "geolocation", whose "content" definition is actually dependent
   on the "precision" attribute, which in turn is a JSON string whose
   value belongs to the following JSON array:

   geolocation_precision_set = ["countrycode", "boundingbox", "circle"]

   If the "precision" attribute of the "geolocation" property of an
   endpoint is "countrycode", the following "content" attribute is
   defined as the ISO 3166 two-letter country codes of the region the
   endpoint resides in, as a JSON string.

   If the "precision" attribute of the "geolocation" property of an
   endpoint is "boundingbox", the following "content" attribute is
   defined as a four-element JSON object "bounding_box":

   bounding_box = {
                "latul" : number,
                "longul" : number,
                "latbr": number,
                "longbr" : number



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 8

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   }

   If the "precision" attribute of the "geolocation" property of an
   endpoint is "circle", the following "content" attribute is defined as
   a three-element JSON object "circle_location":

   circle_location = {
                "latc" : number,
                "longc" : number,
                "radius": number
   }


4.2. Node-related properties

4.2.1. End Point Property Type: participating_role

   Different types of end points have different roles or participating
   policies for a given application, which can be explored in making a
   better decision when choosing a serving node. For example, as
   described in [I-D.draft-deng-alto-p2pcache], P2P caching node can
   also act as p2p peers in a p2p network.  If a p2p caching peer is
   located near the edge of the network, it will reduce the backbone
   traffic, as well as the uploading traffic.  [RFC7069] provides one
   example of such caching nodes.  P2P caching peers are usually
   expected to be given higher priority than the ordinary peers for
   serving a content request so as to optimize the network traffic.  So
   it's necessary for the End Point property to support this indication.

   In general, the end points which belong to different participating
   parties (subscriber, ISP, or ICP) within an application's service
   transaction demonstrate different role/policies.

   It is straightforward for an ISP to acquire the information of an end
   point's participation role from its local record for its subscribers,
   its local or third party infrastructure for a given application.

   To this end, an EP property is defined as a JSON object, with the
   name "participating_role", whose "precision" attribute is set to ""
   and its "content" attribute is defined as a JSON string, whose value
   belongs to the following array:

   participating_role_set=["user", "cache", "super_node"]

   In other words, the "participating_role" property is defined as
   follows:

   participating_role : {



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                    Page 9

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


        "precision": "",
        "content": ["user", "cache", "super_node"]
   }

4.2.2. End Point Property Type: battery_limited

   Another important End Point property that will impact peer selection
   is what kind of power supply the peer has.  It can be either the
   electric power or the battery supply.

   And for most of the time, it is safe to bet that electric power
   supplied nodes would stay online longer than those battery supplied
   nodes, while battery powered devices are usually less willing to act
   as super peer, relay, etc.

   And most of the nowadays intelligent equipments are aware of their
   power supply type.  But it is necessary that the power supply of a
   peer can be queried through some method no matter whether or not it
   is limited by its battery.

   To this end, an EP property is defined as a JSON object, with the
   name "battery_limited", whose "precision" attribute is set to "" and
   its "content" attribute is defined as a boolean, is either "true" or
   "false".

   If the peer in question is actually battery-limited, the value of
   this property with respect to the peer is set to "true".

   In other words, the "content" attribute of the "battery_limited"
   property is defined as a JSON boolean, "true" for a battery supplied
   end point, or "false" for an electricity supplied end point or for an
   end point with an unknown power supply type.

   "battery_limited": {
        "precision": "",
        "content": true/false
   }


4.2.3. End Point Property Type: local_capacity

   For resource-consuming applications, it would be helpful to know the
   local capacity (e.g., in terms of computing, storage, and networking)
   of an end point before it is selected.

   In other words, the "local_capacity" property is defined as a JSON
   object, as follows:




Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 10

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   "local_capacity": {
        "precision": "",
        "content":{
                "CPU":          {
                        "volume": integer,
                        "meter": string
                },
                "memory":{
                        "volume": integer,
                        "meter": string
                },
                "storage": {
                        "volume": integer,
                        "meter": string
                }
        }
   }


4.3. Network-Related Properties

4.3.1. End Point Property Type: network_access

   One important End Point property that will impact peer selection is
   the type of the node's access network.

   Note: There is remaining doubt on whether or not this property is
   needed, since at least part of the information it reflects, for
   instance, the end point's provisioned bandwidth, is defined and
   exposed by other properties.

   For instance, a mobile subscriber's access network can be 2G, 3G, or
   4G. Take another example of a node owned by a home subscriber, the
   type of its access network can be DSL, FTTB, or FTTH.

   Different type of access network gives a clear indication on both the
   amount and the technology of the provisioned resources (e.g. the
   shared/guaranteed bandwidth, the interval for physical channel
   scheduling, etc.)

   Moreover, one may prefer to specify a special access type for a node
   deployed in a data center too, because it is likely to be more
   robust, and have more network resources than either mobile or home
   users.

   Hence application may have its own algorithm for peer selection or
   traffic rendering if the node access type information can be provided
   via an End Point property. The value for this property can be



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 11

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   enumerated as "adsl", "ftth", "fttb", "dc", and etc.

   In case that the end point has its own privacy concerns in revealing
   its access network type directly to potentially distrusted
   applications through ALTO, another indirect way of exposing the
   similar information can be used by "access_preference" as per ISP's
   judgement.

   In essence, an ISP assigned "access_preference" property for the end
   points gives the network operator a chance to say which end point's
   link is "better" without having to tell what the actual criterion
   is.

   The value for this property (defined as integer) can be set by the
   ISP of the ALTO server, based on its own relative preference to
   different network access types. A peer with the higher value is more
   preferable than another peer with the lower value.

   For example, an ISP could use the following setting for now:

    1 = DSL; 10 = FTTB; 12 = FTTH; 50 = DC;

   and add "100=new_technology", when some new technology better than
   FTTH appears later.

   To this end, an EP property is defined as a JSON object with the name
   "network_access", with two different values for "precision"

   network_precision_set=["technology", "rank"]

   In other words, the "content" of the "network_access" property is
   dependent on the value of its "precision" attribute.

   If the value of "precision" is "technology", the following "content"
   attribute is defined as a JSON string, whose value belongs to the
   following array:

   network_access_set = ["adsl", "ftth", "fttb", "dc", "2G", "3G", "4G"]

   If the value of "precision" is "rank", the following "content"
   attribute is defined as a JSON number, whose value indicates the
   relative preference over the end point in question, in terms of its
   access network. The end point with a higher number is more preferable
   to another end point with a lower number.

   In summary, the "network_access" property is defined as a JSON
   object, as follows:




Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 12

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   "network_access": {
        "precision": "technology",
        "content":["adsl", "ftth", "fttb", "dc", "2G", "3G", "4G"]
   }

   "network_access": {
        "precision": "ranking",
        "content": number
   }



4.3.2. End Point Property Type: forwarding_class

   As suggested for the NFV use-case, the End Point property
   "forwarding_class" is meant to indicate the type of forwarding class
   the end point or network supports.

   Forwarding classes can be thought of as output queues. For a
   classifier to assign an output queue to a packet, it must associate
   the packet with one of the following forwarding classes:

      o Expedited forwarding (EF), provides a low-loss, low-latency,
      low- jitter, assured bandwidth, end-to-end service.

      o Assured forwarding (AF), provides a group of values you can
      define and includes four subclasses: AF1, AF2, AF3, and AF4, each
      with three drop probabilities: low, medium, and high.

      o Best effort (BE), provides no service profile. For the best
      effort forwarding class, loss priority is typically not carried in
      a class-of-service (CoS) value.

      o Network control (NC), is typically high priority because it
      supports protocol control.


   Hence, the "content" of the "forwarding_class" property is defined as
   a JSON string, whose value belongs to the following array:

   forwarding_class_set = ["expedited", "assured", "network control",
   "best effort"]

   In summary, the "forwarding_class" property is defined as a JSON
   object, as follows:

   "forwarding_class": {
        "precision": "",



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 13

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


        "content": ["expedited", "assured", "network control", "best effort"]
   }

4.4. Subscription-Related Properties

4.4.1. End Point Property Type: volume_limited

   Many wireless operators offer low-cost plans, which limit the amount
   of data to be transmitted within a month to some gigabytes. After
   that they will throttle the subscriber's bandwidth or charge extra
   money. Hosts with such a tariff, could be tagged by another End Point
   property "volume_limited" and should be avoided for peer selection to
   serve other peers.

   The "content" value for this property (defined as a boolean) is
   either "true" or "false". If a peer is constrained by such a
   subscription plan, the value of this property with respect to the
   peer is set to "true".

   In other words, the "volume_limited" property is defined as a JSON
   object with a boolean "content", "true"for an end point with such a
   limited data plan, or "false" for an point with unlimited or unknown
   data plan.

   "volume_limited": {
        "precision": "",
        "content": true/false
   }

4.4.2. End Point Property Type: provisioned_bandwidth

   For applications seeking for a candidate peer for uploading services,
   the end point's uploading bandwidth is essential for the selection.

   While it is straightforward for one to expose the accurate
   information over an end point's bandwidth capability, the subscriber
   of the end point might consider it a piece of private information.

   On the other hand, it is suggested that the ISP can also choose to
   expose its relative preference in terms of the end point's
   provisioned bandwidth; this ensures better load balancing within the
   network by avoiding undesirable hot spots caused by competition from
   applications for the handful most provisioned end points.

   Therefore, the "provisioned_bandwidth" property is defined as a JSON
   object, whose "content" definition is actually dependent on the
   "precision" attribute, which in turn is a JSON string whose values
   belong to the following JSON array:



Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 14

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


   provisioned_bandwidth_precision_set = ["raw", "ranking"]

   If the "precision" attribute of the "provisioned_bandwidth" property
   of an end point is "raw", the following "content" is filled with the
   accurate value of the provisioned bandwidth, as a JSON object
   "provisioned_bandwidth_value" with two elements:

   provisioned_bandwidth_value = {
                "value" : number,
                "metric" : ["GB", "MB", "KB", "Gb", "Mb", "Kb"]
   }

   If the "precision" attributed of the "provisioned_bandwidth" property
   of an end point is "ranking", the following "content" is filled with
   the relative ranking of the end point's provisioned bandwidth
   assigned by the ISP, which in turn is a JSON number where higher
   number indicating more preference.

   In summary, the "provisioned_bandwidth" property is defined as a JSON
   object as follows:

   "provisioned_bandwidth": {
        "precision": "raw",
        "content": {
                "value": number,
                "metric": ["GB", "MB", "KB", "Gb", "Mb", "Kb"]
        }
   }

   "provisioned_bandwidth": {
        "precision": "ranking",
        "content": number,
   }

5.  Security Considerations

   TBA.


6.  IANA Considerations

   This document adds the following new End Point property types to the
   existing registry created by ALTO protocol [RFC7285].

   TBA.






Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 15

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

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


   [RFC7285] Alimi, R., Penno, R., and Y. Yang, "ALTO Protocol",
              RFC7285, March 2014.

7.2. Informative References

   [I-D.draft-deng-alto-p2pcache] Deng, L., Chen, W., and Q. Yi,
              "Considerations for ALTO with network-deployed P2P
              caches", draft-deng-alto-p2pcache-03 (work in progress),
              February 2014.

   [RFC7069]  Alimi, R., Rahman, A., Kutscher, D., Yang, Y., Song, H.,
              and K. Pentikousis, "DECoupled Application Data Enroute
              (DECADE)", RFC 7069, November 2013.

   [I-D.draft-roome-alto-pid-properties] Roome, W. and Yang, R., "PID
              Property Extension for ALTO Protocol", draft-roome-alto-
              pid-properties-01 (work in progress), February 2014.

   [I-D.draft-wu-alto-te-metrics] Wu, Q., Yang, R., Lee, Y., and
              Randriamasy, S., "ALTO Traffic Engineering Cost Metrics",
              draft-wu-alto-te-metrics-03 (work-in-progress), June 2014.


Acknowledgements

              The authors would like to thank, Michael Scarf, Vijay
              Gurbani, Reinaldo Penno and Sabine Randriamsy for their
              review and valuable comments.















Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 16

INTERNET DRAFT           EP Extensions for ALTO             Nov 17, 2014


Authors' Addresses


   Lingli Deng
   China Mobile
   China

   Email: denglingli@chinamobile.com



   Haibin Song
   Huawei
   China

   Email: haibin.song@huawei.com



   Sebastian Kiesel
   University of Stuttgart, Computing Center
   Germany

   Email: ietf-alto@skiesel.de



   Richard Yang
   Y. Richard Yang
   Yale University

   Email: yry@cs.yale.edu




   Qin Wu
   Huawei
   China

   Email: sunseawq@huawei.com










Deng, et al.             Expires June 18, 2015                   Page 17


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/