draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-08.txt   draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-09.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force G. Bertrand, Ed. Internet Engineering Task Force G. Bertrand, Ed.
Internet-Draft E. Stephan Internet-Draft E. Stephan
Obsoletes: 3570 (if approved) France Telecom - Orange Obsoletes: 3570 (if approved) France Telecom - Orange
Intended status: Informational T. Burbridge Intended status: Informational T. Burbridge
Expires: December 20, 2012 P. Eardley Expires: January 11, 2013 P. Eardley
BT BT
K. Ma K. Ma
Azuki Systems, Inc. Azuki Systems, Inc.
G. Watson G. Watson
Alcatel-Lucent (Velocix) Alcatel-Lucent (Velocix)
June 18, 2012 July 10, 2012
Use Cases for Content Delivery Network Interconnection Use Cases for Content Delivery Network Interconnection
draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-08 draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-09
Abstract Abstract
Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) are commonly used for improving the Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) are commonly used for improving the
End User experience of a content delivery service, at a reasonable End User experience of a content delivery service while keeping cost
cost. This document focuses on use cases that correspond to at a reasonable level. This document focuses on use cases that
identified industry needs and that are expected to be realized once correspond to identified industry needs and that are expected to be
open interfaces and protocols supporting interconnection of CDNs are realized once open interfaces and protocols supporting
specified and implemented. The document can be used to guide the interconnection of CDNs are specified and implemented. The document
definition of the requirements to be supported by CDN Interconnection can be used to guide the definition of the requirements to be
(CDNI) interfaces. It obsoletes RFC 3570. supported by CDN Interconnection (CDNI) interfaces. It obsoletes RFC
3570.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 20, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 11, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 3, line 8 skipping to change at page 3, line 8
9. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Content Service Providers' Delivery Policies . . . . 13 Appendix A. Content Service Providers' Delivery Policies . . . . 13
A.1. Content Delivery Policy Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . 13 A.1. Content Delivery Policy Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . 13
A.2. Secure Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 A.2. Secure Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
A.3. Branding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.3. Branding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) are commonly used for improving the Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) are commonly used for improving the
End User experience of a content delivery service, at a reasonable End User experience of a content delivery service while keeping cost
cost. This document focuses on use cases that correspond to at a reasonable level. This document focuses on use cases that
identified industry needs and that are expected to be realized once correspond to identified industry needs and that are expected to be
open interfaces and protocols supporting interconnection of CDNs are realized once open interfaces and protocols supporting
specified and implemented. The document can be used to guide the interconnection of CDNs are specified and implemented. The document
definition of the requirements (as documented in can be used to guide the definition of the requirements (as
[I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements]) to be supported by the set of CDN documented in [I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements]) to be supported by the
Interconnection (CDNI) interfaces defined in set of CDN Interconnection (CDNI) interfaces defined in
[I-D.ietf-cdni-problem-statement]. [I-D.ietf-cdni-problem-statement].
RFC 3570 described slightly different terminologies and models for RFC 3570 described slightly different terminologies and models for
"Content Internetworking (CDI)". The present document obsoletes RFC "Content Internetworking (CDI)". The present document obsoletes RFC
3570 to avoid confusion. 3570 to avoid confusion.
This document identifies the main motivations for a CDN Provider to This document identifies the main motivations for a CDN Provider to
interconnect its CDN: interconnect its CDN:
o CDN Footprint Extension Use Cases (Section 2) o CDN Footprint Extension Use Cases (Section 2)
skipping to change at page 11, line 36 skipping to change at page 11, line 36
2. CDN-A has footprint covering traditional fixed line broadband and 2. CDN-A has footprint covering traditional fixed line broadband and
wants to extend coverage to mobile devices. In this case, CDN-A wants to extend coverage to mobile devices. In this case, CDN-A
may contract and interconnect with CDN-B who has both: may contract and interconnect with CDN-B who has both:
* physical footprint inside the mobile network, * physical footprint inside the mobile network,
* the ability to deliver content over a protocol that is * the ability to deliver content over a protocol that is
required by specific mobile devices. required by specific mobile devices.
3. CDN-A only supports IPv4 within its infrastructure but wants to
deliver content over IPv6. CDN-B supports both IPv4 and IPv6
within its infrastructure. CDN-A interconnects with CDN-B to
serve out its content over native IPv6 connections.
These cases can apply to many CDN features that a given CDN Provider These cases can apply to many CDN features that a given CDN Provider
may not be able to support or not be willing to invest in, and thus, may not be able to support or not be willing to invest in, and thus,
that the CDN Provider would delegate to another CDN. that the CDN Provider would delegate to another CDN.
4.2. Technology and Vendor Interoperability 4.2. Technology and Vendor Interoperability
A CDN Provider may deploy a new CDN to run alongside its existing A CDN Provider may deploy a new CDN to run alongside its existing
CDN, as a simple way of migrating its CDN service to a new CDN, as a simple way of migrating its CDN service to a new
technology. In addition, a CDN Provider may have a multi-vendor technology. In addition, a CDN Provider may have a multi-vendor
strategy for its CDN deployment. Finally, a CDN Provider may want to strategy for its CDN deployment. Finally, a CDN Provider may want to
skipping to change at page 13, line 15 skipping to change at page 13, line 15
9. Informative References 9. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-cdni-framework] [I-D.ietf-cdni-framework]
Peterson, L. and B. Davie, "Framework for CDN Peterson, L. and B. Davie, "Framework for CDN
Interconnection", draft-ietf-cdni-framework-00 (work in Interconnection", draft-ietf-cdni-framework-00 (work in
progress), April 2012. progress), April 2012.
[I-D.ietf-cdni-problem-statement] [I-D.ietf-cdni-problem-statement]
Niven-Jenkins, B., Faucheur, F., and N. Bitar, "Content Niven-Jenkins, B., Faucheur, F., and N. Bitar, "Content
Distribution Network Interconnection (CDNI) Problem Distribution Network Interconnection (CDNI) Problem
Statement", draft-ietf-cdni-problem-statement-06 (work in Statement", draft-ietf-cdni-problem-statement-08 (work in
progress), May 2012. progress), June 2012.
[I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements] [I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements]
Leung, K. and Y. Lee, "Content Distribution Network Leung, K. and Y. Lee, "Content Distribution Network
Interconnection (CDNI) Requirements", Interconnection (CDNI) Requirements",
draft-ietf-cdni-requirements-03 (work in progress), draft-ietf-cdni-requirements-03 (work in progress),
June 2012. June 2012.
[RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000. [RFC2818] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000.
Appendix A. Content Service Providers' Delivery Policies Appendix A. Content Service Providers' Delivery Policies
 End of changes. 8 change blocks. 
21 lines changed or deleted 27 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/