| Internet Engineering Task Force | W. Roome |
| Internet-Draft | Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent |
| Intended status: Informational | G. Chen |
| Expires: December 26, 2015 | Huawei Technologies |
| June 24, 2015 |
Interoperability Testing of the ALTO Protocol
draft-roome-alto-interop-ietf93-00
The Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) protocol is designed to allow entities with knowledge about the network infrastructure to export such information to applications that need to choose one or more endpoints to connect to among large sets of logically equivalent ones. This document defines a data set that may be used to test the functionality and interoperability of ALTO clients and servers.
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 December 26, 2015.
Copyright (c) 2015 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.
The Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) protocol is designed to allow entities with knowledge about the network infrastructure to export such information to applications that need to choose one or more endpoints to connect to among large sets of logically equivalent ones.
This document defines procedures to test the functionality and interoperability of ALTO clients and servers.
This document is informational and is NOT NORMATIVE on any aspects of the ALTO protocol. The normative behavior of ALTO entities is prescribed in [RFC7285].
Section 2 defines the network maps, cost maps and other data necessary to provision an ALTO server. This ensures that all tested servers will return the same results, so a client may verify that a server is operating correctly. Section 3 defines the required and optional resources for an ALTO server to provide. Section 4 describes the actions expected from a client. Section 5 describes a set of invalid client requests, to verify that a server can respond correctly to client errors.
While every effort has been made to catalogue representative test cases, this document does not attempt to codify every test case that arises in ALTO. The aim of the document is to focus on areas that highlight the key offerings of the ALTO protocol.
This section defines the data necessary to provision a tested ALTO server in a uniform manner. First it defines a default network map, and associated cost maps for the "routingcost" and "hopcount" metrics. Next it defines an optional alternate network map, along with "routingcost" and "hopcount" costs for that map. Finally it defines a set of optional endpoint properties.
Appendix A gives network and cost map data defined in this section formatted in JSON.
Every tested ALTO server MUST provide a default network map with the PIDs defined below:
PID IP Address Block
---------------------------------------
mine 100.0.0.0/8
mine1 100.0.0.0/10
mine1a 100.0.1.0/24, 100.0.64.0/24, 100.0.192.0/24
mine2 100.64.0.0/10
mine3 100.128.0.0/10
peer1 128.0.0.0/16, 130.0.0.0/16, 2001:DB8:0000::/33
peer2 129.0.0.0/16, 131.0.0.0/16, 2001:DB8:8000::/33
tran1 132.0.0.0/16
tran2 135.0.0.0/16
default 0.0.0.0/0, ::0/0
loopback 127.0.0.0/8, ::1/128
linklocal 169.254.0.0/16, ff80::/10
private 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12,
192.168.0.0/16, fc00::/7
Figure 1: Default Network Map
Each ALTO server MUST provide a cost map for the "routingcost" metric. The following table presents the numerical values for those costs. If a server provides a numerical-mode cost map, it MUST use these values. If a server provides an ordinal-mode cost map, the server may use whatever values it wants, provided the ordinal values preserve the order of the numerical values.
default linklocal loopback mine mine1 mine1a mine2 mine3
default 1.0 - - 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0
linklocal - 1.0 - - - - - -
loopback - - 0.0 - - - - -
mine 75.0 - - 1.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
mine1 75.0 - - 15.0 1.0 2.5 5.0 7.0
mine1a 75.0 - - 15.0 2.0 1.0 7.0 9.0
mine2 75.0 - - 15.0 5.5 7.0 1.0 6.0
mine3 75.0 - - 15.0 7.0 9.0 6.0 1.0
peer1 - - - 30.0 20.0 22.0 23.0 25.0
peer2 - - - 30.0 25.0 24.0 25.0 28.0
private 75.0 - - - - - - -
tran1 - - - 50.0 40.0 42.0 43.0 45.0
tran2 - - - 50.0 45.0 48.0 46.0 49.0
peer1 peer2 private tran1 tran2
default - - 75.0 - -
linklocal - - - - -
private - - - - -
mine 30.0 30.0 - 50.0 50.0
mine1 20.0 25.0 - 40.0 45.0
mine1a 22.0 24.0 - 42.0 48.0
mine2 23.0 25.0 - 43.0 46.0
mine3 25.0 28.0 - 45.0 49.0
peer1 1.0 - - - -
peer2 - 1.0 - - -
private - - 1.0 - -
tran1 - - - 1.0 -
tran2 - - - - 1.0
Figure 2: "routingcost" Numerical Cost Map
Note that this is a partial cost map, in that it does not define a cost for every source and destination PID.
Each ALTO server MAY provide a cost map for the "hopcount" metric. The following table gives the numerical values. As with "routingcost", a numerical-mode cost map MUST use these values, and an ordinal-mode cost map may use any values consistent with this ordering.
default linklocal loopback mine mine1 mine1a mine2 mine3
default 1 - - 10 10 10 10 10
linklocal - 1 - - - - - -
loopback - - 0 - - - - -
mine 10 - - 1 3 3 3 3
mine1 10 - - 3 1 2 2 2
mine1a 10 - - 3 2 1 2 3
mine2 10 - - 3 2 2 1 2
mine3 10 - - 3 2 3 2 1
peer1 - - - 5 4 5 4 4
peer2 - - - 6 5 6 5 5
private 10 - - - - - - -
tran1 - - - 8 6 7 6 6
tran2 - - - 8 7 8 7 7
peer1 peer2 private tran1 tran2
default - - 10 - -
mine 5 6 - 8 8
mine1 4 5 - 6 7
mine1a 5 6 - 7 8
mine2 4 5 - 6 7
mine3 4 5 - 6 7
peer1 1 - - - -
peer2 - 1 - - -
private - - 1 - -
tran1 - - - 1 -
tran2 - - - - 1
Figure 3: "hopcount" Numerical Cost Map
Every tested ALTO server MAY provide an alternate, or secondary, network map with the PIDs defined below:
PID IP Address Block
---------------------------------------
dc1 101.0.0.0/16
dc2 102.0.0.0/16
dc3 103.0.0.0/16
dc4 104.0.0.0/16
user1 201.0.0.0/16
user2 202.0.0.0/16
user3 203.0.0.0/16
user4 204.0.0.0/16
default 0.0.0.0/0, ::0/0
loopback 127.0.0.0/8, ::1/128
linklocal 169.254.0.0/16, ff80::/10
private 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12,
192.168.0.0/16, fc00::/7
Figure 4: Alternate Network Map
Each ALTO server MAY provide a cost map for the "routingcost" metric for the alternate network map. The following table presents the numerical values for those costs. If a server provides a numerical-mode cost map, it MUST use these values. If a server provides an ordinal-mode cost map, the server may use whatever values it wants, provided the ordinal values preserve the order of the numerical values.
dc1 dc2 dc3 dc4 default user1 user2 user3 user4
dc1 0.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 50.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0
dc2 5.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 20.0 30.0
dc3 5.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 50.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 20.0
dc4 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0
default 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 - - - -
user1 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 - 0.0 - - -
user2 20.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 - - 0.0 - -
user3 30.0 20.0 10.0 20.0 - - - 0.0 -
user4 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 - - - - 0.0
Figure 5: "routingcost" Numerical Cost Map
Note that this is a partial cost map, in that it does not define a cost for every source and destination PID.
Each ALTO server MAY provide a cost map for the "hopcount" metric. The following table gives the numerical values. As with "routingcost", a numerical-mode cost map MUST use these values, and an ordinal-mode cost map may use any values consistent with this ordering.
dc1 dc2 dc3 dc4 default user1 user2 user3 user4
dc1 0 1 1 1 8 3 4 5 6
dc2 1 0 1 1 8 4 3 4 5
dc3 1 1 0 1 8 5 4 3 4
dc4 1 1 1 0 8 6 5 4 3
default 8 8 8 8 0 - - - -
user1 3 4 5 6 - 0 - - -
user2 4 3 4 5 - - 0 - -
user3 5 4 3 4 - - - 0 -
user4 6 5 4 3 - - - - 0
Figure 6: "hopcount" Numerical Cost Map
An ALTO server may provide the private endpoint property "priv:ietf-type" with the following values for endpoints in the indicated address blocks:
Value IP Address Block
---------------------------------------
mine 100.0.0.0/8
peer 128.0.0.0/6, 2001:DB8::/32
transit 132.0.0.0/16, 135.0.0.0/16
Figure 7: Values for "priv:ietf-type" endpoint property
An ALTO server MUST provide the following resources, as required by [RFC7285]:
A server MAY provide whatever additional resources it desires, as long as they are consistent with the network maps, cost maps and endpoint properties defined in Section 2. In particular, a server may provide:
However, a server MUST NOT provide more than the two network maps defined in this document. This restriction simplifies testing, because it allows a client to automatically identify the alternate network map (e.g., any network map which is not the default must be the alternate network). If servers could offer three or more network maps, a client would have to be provisioned with the resource id of the alternate network map.
Note that if a server provides a Network Map resource for the alternate network map, [RFC7285] requires the server to also provide a Cost Map resource for the "routingcost" metric, in either "numerical" or "ordinal" mode, and an Endpoint Property Service for that network map's "pid" property.
A server MAY structure the IRD however it wants. In particular, a server may
When given the URI for an ALTO server's IRD, an ALTO client should read the IRD, and for each resource that it recognizes, verify that the server returns the correct response. Note that most of the data the server returns is determined by the network maps, cost maps and property values specified in Section 2, and hence can be verified by a client. Some data cannot be determined a priori (e.g., resource id and tag of a network map), but a client can verify their consistency (e.g., a cost map's dependent-vtag field should match the vtag field of the associated network map).
It is expected that not every client will be able recognize and verify every possible resource. However, each client MUST be able to verify the default network map and the associated "routingcost" cost map. In particular, although clients are not required to recognize the alternate network map, if presented with an IRD with two network maps, every client MUST be able to distinguish the default network map, and its associated cost map, from the alternate network map.
Ideally clients should be scripted. That is, when given the URI for a server, an ideal client would verify the server automatically, without further operator intervention. A client should log the resources it tested, and clearly highlight any response the client considered incorrect.
The HTTP GET-mode resources (Network Map and Cost Map) do not require client input, and hence testing is straight-forward: the client sends the appropriate HTTP GET request, and verifies the response.
However, POST-mode resources, such as Filtered Cost Maps and Endpoint Property Services, require client input. The following sections present recommended input parameters for various resources, and clients SHOULD implement as many of these tests as possible. Clients MAY add additional tests, and are encouraged to do so.
All tests require an appropriate "cost-type" parameter. At a minimum, clients should run these tests for the "routingcost" metric for the default network map. If possible, clients should also run these tests for the "hopcount" metric and the alternate network map.
Clients should remember that when testing "ordinal" costs, any values are acceptable as long as they are consistent with the order of the "numerical" costs defined in Section 2. Clients are also reminded that ordinal values are only comparable to other values in the same request, and a server may recalculate ordinal values for each request. Hence the same cost point may have ordinal value "6" in a full cost map, but have value "1" in a filtered cost map.
mine mine1 mine1a mine2 mine3 peer1 peer2
mine - - - - - 30.0 30.0
mine1 - - - - - 20.0 25.0
mine1a - - - - - 22.0 24.0
mine2 - - - - - 23.0 25.0
mine3 - - - - - 25.0 28.0
peer1 30.0 20.0 22.0 23.0 25.0 - -
peer2 30.0 25.0 24.0 25.0 28.0 - -
Figure 8: Filtered Cost Map Constraint Test
Every client should verify that the server's EPS resource for the default network's "pid" property returns the correct PID name for a representative set of endpoint addresses. If possible, clients should also verify the alternate network's "pid" property and the "priv:ietf-type" property.
The table below gives the expected values for a set of addresses. Clients are encouraged to test other addresses as well.
Address def.pid alt.pid priv:ietf-type
---------------- ------- ------- --------------
ipv4:0.0.0.1 default default -
ipv4:10.1.2.3 private private -
ipv4:100.0.0.1 mine1 default mine
ipv4:100.0.1.1 mine1a default mine
ipv4:100.0.192.1 mine1a default mine
ipv4:100.0.64.1 mine1a default mine
ipv4:100.130.0.1 mine3 default mine
ipv4:100.200.0.1 mine default mine
ipv4:100.75.0.1 mine2 default mine
ipv4:101.0.0.1 default dc1 -
ipv4:101.1.0.1 default default -
ipv4:102.0.0.1 default dc2 -
ipv4:103.0.0.1 default dc3 -
ipv4:104.0.0.1 default dc4 -
ipv4:127.0.0.1 loopback loopback -
ipv4:127.255.255.255 loopback loopback -
ipv4:128.0.0.1 peer1 default peer
ipv4:129.0.0.1 peer2 default peer
ipv4:130.0.0.1 peer1 default peer
ipv4:131.0.0.1 peer2 default peer
ipv4:132.0.0.1 tran1 default transit
ipv4:135.0.0.1 tran2 default transit
ipv4:169.254.1.2 linklocal linklocal -
ipv4:201.0.0.1 default user1 -
ipv4:201.1.2.3 default default -
ipv4:202.0.0.1 default user2 -
ipv4:203.0.0.1 default user3 -
ipv4:204.0.0.1 default user4 -
ipv4:99.0.0.1 default default -
ipv6:::1 loopback loopback -
ipv6:::2 default default -
ipv6:2001:db8:: peer1 default peer
ipv6:2001:db8:8000::1 peer2 default peer
ipv6:fc00:1:: private private -
ipv6:ff80:1:2:: linklocal linklocal -
Figure 9: EPS Test Addresses And Property Values
If the ALTO server provides an Endpoint Cost Service (ECS), and if the client supports ECS queries, then the client SHOULD send representative ECS queries to the server. For ECS, the server should use the costs associated with the default network map, so the client can verify the server's response.
An ECS-aware client SHOULD send the following queries to the server, for the "routingcost" and/or "hopcount" metrics, as suppored by the server. A client may add additional tests as desired.
Query:
sources:
ipv4:100.0.0.128
ipv4:100.131.39.11
destinations:
ipv4:100.0.0.100
ipv4:100.8.1.100
ipv4:100.0.1.100
ipv4:100.64.0.100
ipv4:100.128.4.100
ipv4:130.0.1.100
ipv4:132.0.8.100
Costs: routingcost hopcount
ipv4:100.0.0.128 =>
ipv4:100.0.0.100 1.0 1
ipv4:100.8.1.100 1.0 1
ipv4:100.0.1.100 2.5 2
ipv4:100.64.0.100 5.0 2
ipv4:100.128.4.100 7.0 2
ipv4:130.0.1.100 20.0 4
ipv4:132.0.8.100 40.0 6
ipv4:100.131.39.11 =>
ipv4:100.0.0.100 7.0 2
ipv4:100.8.1.100 7.0 2
ipv4:100.0.1.100 9.0 3
ipv4:100.64.0.100 6.0 2
ipv4:100.128.4.100 1.0 1
ipv4:130.0.1.100 25.0 4
ipv4:132.0.8.100 45.0 6
Figure 10: ECS Test 1
This test determines the costs between various endpoints in the "mine*" and "peer*" PIDs:
Query:
sources:
ipv4:10.0.1.0
ipv6:::2
destinations:
ipv4:10.0.1.1
ipv6:::1:2
Costs: routingcost hopcount
ipv4:10.0.1.0 =>
ipv4:10.0.1.1 1.0 1
ipv6:::1:2 75.0 10
ipv6:::2 =>
ipv4:10.0.1.1 75.0 10
ipv6:::1:2 1.0 1
Figure 11: ECS Test 2
This test determines the costs between endpoints in the "default" PID:
Query:
sources:
ipv4:127.0.0.1
ipv6:::1
destinations:
ipv4:127.0.1.0
Costs: routingcost hopcount
ipv4:127.0.0.1 =>
ipv4:127.0.1.0 0.0 0
ipv6:::1 =>
ipv4:127.0.1.0 0.0 0
Figure 12: ECS Test 3
This test determines the costs between endpoints in the "loopback" PID:
Query:
sources:
ipv4:100.0.0.128
ipv4:100.131.39.11
ipv4:0.0.0.1
ipv4:10.0.0.1
ipv6:::2
destinations:
(none specified)
Costs: routingcost hopcount
(for clients in "default" PID)
ipv4:100.0.0.128 =>
(client address) 75.0 10
ipv4:100.131.39.11 =>
(client address) 75.0 10
ipv4:0.0.0.1
(client address) 1.0 1
ipv4:10.0.0.1
(client address) 75.0 10
ipv6:::2
(client address) 1.0 1
(for clients in "private" PID)
ipv4:100.0.0.128 =>
(client address) - -
ipv4:100.131.39.11 =>
(client address) - -
ipv4:0.0.0.1
(client address) 75.0 10
ipv4:10.0.0.1
(client address) 1.0 1
ipv6:::2
(client address) 75.0 10
Figure 13: ECS Test 4
This test determines the cost when the client does not specify any destination addresses. In this case, the server SHOULD use the client's address as the destination. The costs, however, will depend on the PID for the client's address, which in turn will depend on the network configuration of the test environment. But in most cases, the client's PID will be in either the "default" or "private" PIDs.
Query:
sources:
(none specified)
destinations:
ipv4:100.0.0.128
ipv4:100.131.39.11
ipv4:0.0.0.1
ipv4:10.0.0.1
ipv6:::2
Costs: routingcost hopcount
(for clients in "default" PID)
(client address) =>
ipv4:100.0.0.128 75.0 10
ipv4:100.131.39.11 75.0 10
ipv4:0.0.0.1 1.0 1
ipv4:10.0.0.1 75.0 10
ipv6:::2 1.0 1
(for clients in "private" PID)
(client address) =>
ipv4:100.0.0.128 - -
ipv4:100.131.39.11 - -
ipv4:0.0.0.1 75.0 10
ipv4:10.0.0.1 1.0 1
ipv6:::2 75.0 10
Figure 14: ECS Test 5
This test determines the cost when the client does not specify any source addresses. In this case, the server SHOULD use the client's address as the source. However, as with the previous test, the costs will depend on the PID for the client's address, which in turn will depend on the network configuration of the test environment. But in most cases, the client's PID will be in either the "default" or "private" PIDs.
A client may send various invalid requests to a server to verify that the server returns a reasonable response. The following tests are suggested; clients may do additional tests as desired.
Each error test is defined by
For "property" fields in Endpoint Property Service tests, clients should replace the property name "default.pid" with the resource-specific name of the server's default network map's "pid" property. That is, if the resource id of the server's default network map is "mynet", replace "default.pid" with "mynet.pid".
For an EPS request, the "endpoints" input field should be a JSON array of one or more addresses. In this test, it is a scalar JSON string.
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": "ipv4:1.2.3.4" }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_TYPE
field: endpoints
This test omits the required "properties" input field.
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "endpoints": ["ipv4:1.2.3.4"] }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_MISSING_FIELD
field: properties
This test requests the (presumably!) invalid property "no-such-property".
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["no-such-property"],
"endpoints": "ipv4:1.2.3.4" }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: properties
value: no-such-property
These tests verify that a server rejects various invalid endpoint addresses.
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": ["ipv4:1.2.3.256"] }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: endpoints
value: ipv4:1.2.3.256
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": ["ipv6:2001:db800::"] }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: endpoints
value: ipv6:2001:db800::
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": ["ipv4:2001:db8::"] }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: endpoints
value: ipv4:2001:db8::
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": ["ipv6:1.2.3.4"] }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: endpoints
value: ipv6:1.2.3.4
This test requests the (presumably!) invalid cost metric "no-such-metric". If the server's Filtered Cost Map resource only provides "ordinal" mode cost types, the client should change "numerical" mode to "ordinal" mode, to prevent the server from rejecting the request because of an invalid cost mode.
resource: Filtered Cost Map
accept: application/alto-costmap+json
content-type: application/alto-costmapfilter+json
input: { "cost-type": [
"cost-metric": "no-such-cost",
"cost-mode": "numerical" ],
"endpoints": {
"srcs": [],
"dsts": [] }
}
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: cost-type/cost-metric
value: no-such-cost
This test requests the invalid cost mode "no-such-mode". The client should direct this request to a Filtered Cost Map resource which can return the "routingcost" metric, to prevent the server from rejecting the request because of an invalid cost metric.
resource: Filtered Cost Map
accept: application/alto-costmap+json
content-type: application/alto-costmapfilter+json
input: { "cost-type": [
"cost-metric": "routingcost",
"cost-mode": "no-such-mode" ],
"endpoints": {
"srcs": [],
"dsts": [] }
}
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: cost-type/cost-mode
value: no-such-mode
This test uses a constraint test with the undefined "ne" operator. The client should direct this request to a Filtered Cost Map resource which can return the "routingcost" metric in "numerical" mode, to prevent the server from rejecting the request because of an invalid cost metric or mode.
resource: Filtered Cost Map which accepts constraints
accept: application/alto-costmap+json
content-type: application/alto-costmapfilter+json
input: { "cost-type": [
"cost-metric": "routingcost",
"cost-mode": "numerical" ],
"endpoints": {
"srcs": [],
"dsts": [] },
"constraints": ["ne 10"]
}
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE
field: constraints
value: no-such-mode
This test gives syntactically incorrect JSON input to the server.
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": }
http-status: 400 Bad Request
code: E_SYNTAX
This test attempts to GET the Full Network Map, without including the appropriate media-type ("application/alto-networkmap+json") in the "Accept" HTTP header. Note that the client must ensure that the HTTP library does not automatically append "*/*" to the "Accept" header. Note that because this is an HTTP error, [RFC7285] does not specify the content the server is expected to return.
resource: Full Network Map
accept: text/html
http-status: 406 Not Acceptable
This test requests a property without including the appropriate media-type ("application/alto-endpointprop+json") in the "Accept" HTTP header. Note that the client must ensure that the HTTP library does not automatically append "*/*" to the "Accept" header. Note that because this is an HTTP error, [RFC7285] does not specify the content the server is expected to return.
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: text/html
content-type: application/alto-endpointpropparams+json
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": ["ipv4:1.2.3.4"] }
http-status: 406 Not Acceptable
This test requests a property but provides input with an incorrect Content-Type. Note that because this is an HTTP error, [RFC7285] does not specify the content the server is expected to return.
resource: Endpoint Property Service
accept: application/alto-endpointprop+json
content-type: text/text
input: { "properties": ["default.pid"],
"endpoints": ["ipv4:1.2.3.4"] }
http-status: 415 Unsupported Media Type
(or 404 Not Found or 400 Bad Request)
This document does not present any new security considerations above and beyond what is documented in the ALTO protocol [RFC7285].
This document does not require any action from IANA.
| [RFC7159] | Bray, T., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", RFC 7159, March 2014. |
| [RFC7285] | Almi, R., Penno, R., Yang, Y., Kiesel, S., Previdi, S., Roome, W., Shalunov, S. and R. Woundy, "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol", RFC 7285, September 2014. |
This section presents the network and cost maps defined in Section 2 formatted as JSON ([RFC7159]) objects.
"network-map": {
"default": {
"ipv4": ["0.0.0.0/0"],
"ipv6": ["::/0"] },
"linklocal": {
"ipv4": ["169.254.0.0/16"],
"ipv6": ["FF80::/10"] },
"loopback": {
"ipv4": ["127.0.0.0/8"],
"ipv6": ["::1/128"] },
"mine": {
"ipv4": ["100.0.0.0/8"] },
"mine1": {
"ipv4": ["100.0.0.0/10"] },
"mine1a": {
"ipv4": ["100.0.64.0/24", "100.0.192.0/24", "100.0.1.0/24"] },
"mine2": {
"ipv4": ["100.64.0.0/10"] },
"mine3": {
"ipv4": ["100.128.0.0/10"] },
"peer1": {
"ipv4": ["130.0.0.0/16", "128.0.0.0/16"],
"ipv6": ["2001:DB8::/33"] },
"peer2": {
"ipv4": ["131.0.0.0/16", "129.0.0.0/16"],
"ipv6": ["2001:DB8:8000::/33"] },
"private": {
"ipv4": ["10.0.0.0/8", "172.16.0.0/12", "192.168.0.0/16"],
"ipv6": ["FC00::/7"] },
"tran1": {
"ipv4": ["132.0.0.0/16"] },
"tran2": {
"ipv4": ["135.0.0.0/16"] }
}
Figure 15: Default Network Map, in JSON
"cost-map": {
"default": {
"default": 1.0, "mine": 75.0, "mine1": 75.0, "mine1a": 75.0,
"mine2": 75.0, "mine3": 75.0, "private": 75.0 },
"linklocal": {
"linklocal": 1.0 },
"loopback": {
"loopback": 0.0 },
"mine": {
"default": 75.0, "mine": 1.0, "mine1": 15.0, "mine1a": 15.0,
"mine2": 15.0, "mine3": 15.0, "peer1": 30.0, "peer2": 30.0,
"tran1": 50.0, "tran2": 50.0 },
"mine1": {
"default": 75.0, "mine": 15.0, "mine1": 1.0, "mine1a": 2.5,
"mine2": 5.0, "mine3": 7.0, "peer1": 20.0, "peer2": 25.0,
"tran1": 40.0, "tran2": 45.0 },
"mine1a": {
"default": 75.0, "mine": 15.0, "mine1": 2.0, "mine1a": 1.0,
"mine2": 7.0, "mine3": 9.0, "peer1": 22.0, "peer2": 24.0,
"tran1": 42.0, "tran2": 48.0 },
"mine2": {
"default": 75.0, "mine": 15.0, "mine1": 5.5, "mine1a": 7.0,
"mine2": 1.0, "mine3": 6.0, "peer1": 23.0, "peer2": 25.0,
"tran1": 43.0, "tran2": 46.0 },
"mine3": {
"default": 75.0, "mine": 15.0, "mine1": 7.0, "mine1a": 9.0,
"mine2": 6.0, "mine3": 1.0, "peer1": 25.0, "peer2": 28.0,
"tran1": 45.0, "tran2": 49.0 },
"peer1": {
"mine": 30.0, "mine1": 20.0, "mine1a": 22.0, "mine2": 23.0,
"mine3": 25.0, "peer1": 1.0 },
"peer2": {
"mine": 30.0, "mine1": 25.0, "mine1a": 24.0, "mine2": 25.0,
"mine3": 28.0, "peer2": 1.0 },
"private": {
"default": 75.0, "private": 1.0 },
"tran1": {
"mine": 50.0, "mine1": 40.0, "mine1a": 42.0, "mine2": 43.0,
"mine3": 45.0, "tran1": 1.0 },
"tran2": {
"mine": 50.0, "mine1": 45.0, "mine1a": 48.0, "mine2": 46.0,
"mine3": 49.0, "tran2": 1.0 }
}
Figure 16: Default "routingcost" Cost Map, in JSON
"cost-map": {
"default": {
"default": 1, "mine": 10, "mine1": 10, "mine1a": 10,
"mine2": 10, "mine3": 10, "private": 10 },
"linklocal": {
"linklocal": 1 },
"loopback": {
"loopback": 0 },
"mine": {
"default": 10, "mine": 1, "mine1": 3, "mine1a": 3,
"mine2": 3, "mine3": 3, "peer1": 5, "peer2": 6,
"tran1": 8, "tran2": 8 },
"mine1": {
"default": 10, "mine": 3, "mine1": 1, "mine1a": 2,
"mine2": 2, "mine3": 2, "peer1": 4, "peer2": 5,
"tran1": 6, "tran2": 7 },
"mine1a": {
"default": 10, "mine": 3, "mine1": 2, "mine1a": 1,
"mine2": 2, "mine3": 3, "peer1": 5, "peer2": 6,
"tran1": 7, "tran2": 8 },
"mine2": {
"default": 10, "mine": 3, "mine1": 2, "mine1a": 2,
"mine2": 1, "mine3": 2, "peer1": 4, "peer2": 5,
"tran1": 6, "tran2": 7 },
"mine3": {
"default": 10, "mine": 3, "mine1": 2, "mine1a": 3,
"mine2": 2, "mine3": 1, "peer1": 4, "peer2": 5,
"tran1": 6, "tran2": 7 },
"peer1": {
"mine": 5, "mine1": 4, "mine1a": 5, "mine2": 4,
"mine3": 4, "peer1": 1 },
"peer2": {
"mine": 6, "mine1": 5, "mine1a": 6, "mine2": 5,
"mine3": 5, "peer2": 1 },
"private": {
"default": 10, "private": 1 },
"tran1": {
"mine": 8, "mine1": 6, "mine1a": 7, "mine2": 6,
"mine3": 6, "tran1": 1 },
"tran2": {
"mine": 8, "mine1": 7, "mine1a": 8, "mine2": 7,
"mine3": 7, "tran2": 1 }
}
Figure 17: Default "hopcount" Cost Map, in JSON
"network-map": {
"dc1": {
"ipv4": ["101.0.0.0/16"] },
"dc2": {
"ipv4": ["102.0.0.0/16"] },
"dc3": {
"ipv4": ["103.0.0.0/16"] },
"dc4": {
"ipv4": ["104.0.0.0/16"] },
"default": {
"ipv4": ["0.0.0.0/0"],
"ipv6": ["::/0"] },
"linklocal": {
"ipv4": ["169.254.0.0/16"],
"ipv6": ["FF80::/10"] },
"loopback": {
"ipv4": ["127.0.0.0/8"],
"ipv6": ["::1/128"] },
"private": {
"ipv4": ["10.0.0.0/8", "172.16.0.0/12", "192.168.0.0/16"],
"ipv6": ["FC00::/7"] },
"user1": {
"ipv4": ["201.0.0.0/16"] },
"user2": {
"ipv4": ["202.0.0.0/16"] },
"user3": {
"ipv4": ["203.0.0.0/16"] },
"user4": {
"ipv4": ["204.0.0.0/16"] }
}
Figure 18: Alternate Network Map, in JSON
"cost-map": {
"dc1": {
"dc1": 0.0, "dc2": 5.0, "dc3": 5.0, "dc4": 5.0,
"default": 50.0, "user1": 10.0, "user2": 20.0,
"user3": 30.0, "user4": 40.0 },
"dc2": {
"dc1": 5.0, "dc2": 0.0, "dc3": 5.0, "dc4": 5.0,
"default": 50.0, "user1": 20.0, "user2": 10.0,
"user3": 20.0, "user4": 30.0 },
"dc3": {
"dc1": 5.0, "dc2": 5.0, "dc3": 0.0, "dc4": 5.0,
"default": 50.0, "user1": 30.0, "user2": 20.0,
"user3": 10.0, "user4": 20.0 },
"dc4": {
"dc1": 5.0, "dc2": 5.0, "dc3": 5.0, "dc4": 0.0,
"default": 50.0, "user1": 40.0, "user2": 30.0,
"user3": 20.0, "user4": 10.0 },
"default": {
"dc1": 50.0, "dc2": 50.0, "dc3": 50.0, "dc4": 50.0,
"default": 0.0 },
"user1": {
"dc1": 10.0, "dc2": 20.0, "dc3": 30.0, "dc4": 40.0,
"user1": 0.0 },
"user2": {
"dc1": 20.0, "dc2": 10.0, "dc3": 20.0, "dc4": 30.0,
"user2": 0.0 },
"user3": {
"dc1": 30.0, "dc2": 20.0, "dc3": 10.0, "dc4": 20.0,
"user3": 0.0 },
"user4": {
"dc1": 40.0, "dc2": 30.0, "dc3": 20.0, "dc4": 10.0,
"user4": 0.0 }
}
Figure 19: Alternate "routingcost" Cost Map, in JSON
"cost-map": {
"dc1": {
"dc1": 0, "dc2": 1, "dc3": 1, "dc4": 1,
"default": 8, "user1": 3, "user2": 4, "user3": 5,
"user4": 6 },
"dc2": {
"dc1": 1, "dc2": 0, "dc3": 1, "dc4": 1,
"default": 8, "user1": 4, "user2": 3, "user3": 4,
"user4": 5 },
"dc3": {
"dc1": 1, "dc2": 1, "dc3": 0, "dc4": 1,
"default": 8, "user1": 5, "user2": 4, "user3": 3,
"user4": 4 },
"dc4": {
"dc1": 1, "dc2": 1, "dc3": 1, "dc4": 0,
"default": 8, "user1": 6, "user2": 5, "user3": 4,
"user4": 3 },
"default": {
"dc1": 8, "dc2": 8, "dc3": 8, "dc4": 8,
"default": 0 },
"user1": {
"dc1": 3, "dc2": 4, "dc3": 5, "dc4": 6,
"user1": 0 },
"user2": {
"dc1": 4, "dc2": 3, "dc3": 4, "dc4": 5,
"user2": 0 },
"user3": {
"dc1": 5, "dc2": 4, "dc3": 3, "dc4": 4,
"user3": 0 },
"user4": {
"dc1": 6, "dc2": 5, "dc3": 4, "dc4": 3,
"user4": 0 }
},
Figure 20: Alternate "hopcount" Cost Map, in JSON