Internet DRAFT - draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext
draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext
ALTO Working Group L. Deng
INTERNET-DRAFT China Mobile
Intended Status: Standard Track H. Song
Expires: April 20, 2016 Huawei
S. Kiesel
University of Stuttgart
R. Yang
Yale
Q. Wu
Huawei
October 19, 2015
Extended End Point Properties for Application-Layer Traffic Optimization
draft-deng-alto-p2p-ext-07
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 1
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 . . . . . . . . 11
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 . . . . 15
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 2
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 3
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 4
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 5
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 6
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 7
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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.
Moreover, in a data-center, the relative location of a serving node
may be of interest to an ALTO client, where much finer-grained
information (e.g. the hosting physical server or rack number) are
relevant and can be dynamically updated by either a live migration of
a serving node contained in a virtualization container or a traffic
handover between active and standby instances during an HA/LB switch-
off.
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",
"dc"]
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.
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 8
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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
}
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
}
If the "precision" attribute of the "geolocation" property of an
endpoint is "dc-location", the following "content" attribute is
defined as a four-element JSON object "dc-location":
dc-location = { "rack-id" : number,
"server-id" : 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
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 9
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 : {
"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
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 10
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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:
"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.
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 11
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
For instance, a mobile subscriber's access network can be cellular
(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
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"]
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 12
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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", "cellular"]
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:
"network-access": {
"precision": "technology",
"content":["adsl", "ftth", "fttb", "dc", "cellular"]
}
"network-access": {
"precision": "ranking",
"content": number
}
Note: There is concern about undesirable privacy leakage via network-
access properties to distrusted ALTO clients. In such cases,
according to the definitions above, either the endpoint itself or the
ISP who is running the ALTO server can either specify an access
control policy to prevent undesirable exposure to specific ALTO
clients or use a privacy preserving mapping from the raw description
of access technologies to a number of abstract relative ranking
information instead. Moreover, the endpoint or the ISP might choose
to use another subscription related property "provisioned-bandwidth"
(defined later in Section 4.4.2) instead of "network-access".
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
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 13
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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": "",
"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".
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 14
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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:
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.
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 15
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 16
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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, Sabine Randriamsy and Qiao Fu for
their review and valuable comments.
Deng, et al. Expires Apr 20, 2016 Page 17
INTERNET DRAFT EP Extensions for ALTO Oct 19, 2015
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 Apr 20, 2016 Page 18
