--- 1/draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-06.txt 2012-06-11 16:14:14.093342327 +0200 +++ 2/draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-07.txt 2012-06-11 16:14:14.121341630 +0200 @@ -1,53 +1,53 @@ Internet Engineering Task Force G. Bertrand, Ed. Internet-Draft E. Stephan -Intended status: Informational France Telecom - Orange -Expires: November 25, 2012 T. Burbridge - P. Eardley +Obsoletes: 3570 (if approved) France Telecom - Orange +Intended status: Informational T. Burbridge +Expires: December 13, 2012 P. Eardley BT K. Ma Azuki Systems, Inc. G. Watson Alcatel-Lucent (Velocix) - May 24, 2012 + June 11, 2012 Use Cases for Content Delivery Network Interconnection - draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-06 + draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-07 Abstract Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) are commonly used for improving the End User experience of a content delivery service, at a reasonable cost. This document focuses on use cases that correspond to identified industry needs and that are expected to be realized once open interfaces and protocols supporting interconnection of CDNs are specified and implemented. The document can be used to guide the definition of the requirements to be supported by CDN Interconnection - (CDNI) interfaces. + (CDNI) interfaces. It obsoletes RFC 3570. 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 http://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 November 25, 2012. + This Internet-Draft will expire on December 13, 2012. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2012 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 @@ -62,24 +62,24 @@ 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.3. Rationale for Multi-CDN Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Footprint Extension Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1. Geographic Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.2. Inter-Affiliates Interconnection . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3. ISP Handling of Third-Party Content . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.4. Nomadic Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Offload Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 3.1. Overload Handling and Dimensioning . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.1. Overload Handling and Dimensioning . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2. Resiliency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2.1. Failure of Content Delivery Resources . . . . . . . . 9 - 3.2.2. Content Acquisition Resiliency . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.2.2. Content Acquisition Resiliency . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. CDN Capability Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. Device and Network Technology Extension . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2. Technology and Vendor Interoperability . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.3. QoE and QoS Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. Enforcement of Content Delivery Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 9. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Content Service Providers' Delivery Policies . . . . 13 @@ -94,20 +94,24 @@ End User experience of a content delivery service, at a reasonable cost. This document focuses on use cases that correspond to identified industry needs and that are expected to be realized once open interfaces and protocols supporting interconnection of CDNs are specified and implemented. The document can be used to guide the definition of the requirements (as documented in [I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements]) to be supported by the set of CDN Interconnection (CDNI) interfaces defined in [I-D.ietf-cdni-problem-statement]. + RFC 3570 described slightly different terminologies and models for + "Content Internetworking (CDI)". The present document obsoletes RFC + 3570 to avoid confusion. + This document identifies the main motivations for a CDN Provider to interconnect its CDN: o CDN Footprint Extension Use Cases (Section 2) o CDN Offload Use Cases (Section 3) o CDN Capability Use Cases (Section 4) Then, the document highlights the need for interoperability in order @@ -554,22 +557,22 @@ [I-D.ietf-cdni-problem-statement] Niven-Jenkins, B., Faucheur, F., and N. Bitar, "Content Distribution Network Interconnection (CDNI) Problem Statement", draft-ietf-cdni-problem-statement-06 (work in progress), May 2012. [I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements] Leung, K. and Y. Lee, "Content Distribution Network Interconnection (CDNI) Requirements", - draft-ietf-cdni-requirements-02 (work in progress), - December 2011. + draft-ietf-cdni-requirements-03 (work in progress), + June 2012. [RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000. Appendix A. Content Service Providers' Delivery Policies CSPs commonly apply different delivery policies to given sets of content assets delivered through CDNs. Interconnected CDNs need to support these policies. This annex presents examples of CSPs' delivery policies and their consequences on CDNI operations.