draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05.txt   draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-06.txt 
ALTO Working Group Q. Wu ALTO Working Group Q. Wu
Internet-Draft Huawei Internet-Draft Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track Y. Yang Intended status: Standards Track Y. Yang
Expires: April 24, 2019 Yale University Expires: June 1, 2019 Yale University
Y. Lee Y. Lee
D. Dhody D. Dhody
Huawei Huawei
S. Randriamasy S. Randriamasy
Nokia Bell Labs Nokia Bell Labs
October 21, 2018 November 28, 2018
ALTO Performance Cost Metrics ALTO Performance Cost Metrics
draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-05 draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-06
Abstract Abstract
Cost Metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic Cost Metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic
Optimization (ALTO). It is used in both the Cost Map Service and the Optimization (ALTO). It is used in both the Cost Map Service and the
Endpoint Cost Service. Endpoint Cost Service.
Different applications may benefit from different Cost Metrics. For Different applications may benefit from different Cost Metrics. For
example, a Resource Consumer may prefer Resource Providers that offer example, a Resource Consumer may prefer Resource Providers that offer
a low delay delivery to the Resource Consumer. However the base ALTO a low delay delivery to the Resource Consumer. However, the base
protocol [ALTO] has documented only one single cost metric, i.e., the ALTO protocol has documented only one single cost metric, i.e., the
generic "routingcost" metric (Sec. 14.2 of ALTO base specification generic "routingcost" metric (Sec. 14.2 of ALTO base specification
[ALTO]). [RFC7285]).
This document, proposes a set of Cost Metrics, derived and aggregated This document proposes a set of Cost Metrics, derived and aggregated
from routing protocols with different granularity and scope, such as from routing protocols with different granularity and scope, such as
BGP-LS,OSPF-TE and ISIS-TE, or from end-to-end traffic management BGP-LS, OSPF-TE and ISIS-TE, or from end-to-end traffic management
tools. It currently documents Network Performance Cost Metrics tools. It currently documents Network Performance Cost Metrics
reporting on network delay, jitter, packet loss, hop count, and reporting on network delay, jitter, packet loss, hop count, and
bandwidth. These metrics may be exposed by an ALTO Server to allow bandwidth. These metrics may be exposed by an ALTO Server to allow
applications to determine "where" to connect based on network applications to determine "where" to connect based on network
performance criteria. Additional Cost Metrics involving ISP specific performance criteria. Additional Cost Metrics involving ISP specific
considerations or other network technologies may be documented in considerations or other network technologies may be documented in
further versions of this draft. further versions of this draft.
Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
"SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY",
skipping to change at page 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://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 April 24, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 1, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://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 2, line 46 skipping to change at page 2, line 46
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Challenges on data sources and computation of ALTO 2. Challenges on data sources and computation of ALTO
performance metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 performance metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Data sources Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Data sources Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. ALTO performance metrics Computation Challenges . . . . . 5 2.2. ALTO performance metrics Computation Challenges . . . . . 5
2.2.1. Configuration Parameters Challenge . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2.1. Configuration Parameters Challenge . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.2. Availability of end to end path values Challenge . . 6 2.2.2. Availability of end to end path values Challenge . . 6
3. Cost Metric: OWDelay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Network Performance Cost Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Cost Metric: RTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.1. Cost Metric: OWDelay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Cost Metric: PDV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.2. Cost Metric: RTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Cost Metric: Hop Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.3. Cost Metric: PDV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Cost Metric: Packet Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.4. Cost Metric: Hop Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Cost Metric: Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.5. Cost Metric: Packet Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Traffic Engineering Performance Cost Metrics . . . . . . . . 18 3.6. Cost Metric: Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.1. Cost Metric: Link Maximum Reservable Bandwidth . . . . . 19
9.2. Cost Metric: Link Residue Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4. Traffic Engineering Performance Cost Metrics . . . . . . . . 18
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.1. Cost Metric: Link Maximum Reservable Bandwidth . . . . . 19
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4.2. Cost Metric: Link Residue Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . 20
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Cost Metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic Cost Metric is a basic concept in Application-Layer Traffic
Optimization (ALTO). It is used in both the Cost Map Service and the Optimization (ALTO). It is used in both the Cost Map Service and the
Endpoint Cost Service. In particular, applications may benefit from Endpoint Cost Service. In particular, applications may benefit from
knowing network performance measured on several Cost Metrics. For knowing network performance measured on several Cost Metrics. For
example, a more delay-sensitive application may focus on latency, and example, a more delay-sensitive application may focus on latency, and
a more bandwidth-sensitive application may focus on available a more bandwidth-sensitive application may focus on available
bandwidth. bandwidth.
This document introduces a set of new cost metrics, listed in This document introduces a set of new cost metrics, listed in
Table 1, to support the aforementioned applications and allow them to Table 1, to support the aforementioned applications and allow them to
determine "where" to connect based on network performance criteria. determine "where" to connect based on network performance criteria.
Hence, this document extends the base ALTO protocol [ALTO], which Hence, this document extends the base ALTO protocol [RFC7285], which
defines only a single cost metric, i.e., the generic "routingcost" defines only a single cost metric, i.e., the generic "routingcost"
metric (Sec. 14.2 of ALTO base specification [ALTO]). metric (Sec. 14.2 of ALTO base specification [RFC7285]).
+----------+--------------+----------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------+----------------------------------------+
|Namespace | Property | Reference | |Namespace | Property | Reference |
+----------+--------------+----------------------------------------+ +----------+--------------+----------------------------------------+
| | owdelay | See Section 3,[RFC2679] Section 3.6 | | | owdelay | See Section 3,[RFC2679] Section 3.6 |
| | rtt | See Section 4,[RFC2681] Section 2.6 | | | rtt | See Section 4,[RFC2681] Section 2.6 |
| | pdv | See Section 5,[RFC3393] Section 2.6 | | | pdv | See Section 5,[RFC3393] Section 2.6 |
| | hopcount | See Section 6,[RFC7285] | | | hopcount | See Section 6,[RFC7285] |
| | pktloss | See Section 7,[RFC7680] Section 2.6 | | | pktloss | See Section 7,[RFC7680] Section 2.6 |
| | throughput | See Section x, [RFC6349] Section 3.3 | | | throughput | See Section x, [RFC6349] Section 3.3 |
skipping to change at page 5, line 13 skipping to change at page 5, line 13
type specification. type specification.
2. Challenges on data sources and computation of ALTO performance 2. Challenges on data sources and computation of ALTO performance
metrics metrics
2.1. Data sources Challenge 2.1. Data sources Challenge
An ALTO server needs data sources to compute the cost metrics An ALTO server needs data sources to compute the cost metrics
described in this document. This document does not define the exact described in this document. This document does not define the exact
data sources. For example, the ALTO server may use log servers or data sources. For example, the ALTO server may use log servers or
the OAM system as its data source [ALTO-DEPLOYMENT]. In particular, the OAM system as its data source [RFC7971]. In particular, the cost
the cost metrics defined in this document can be computed using metrics defined in this document can be computed using routing
routing systems as the data sources. Mechanisms defined in systems as the data sources. Mechanisms defined in [RFC2681],
[RFC2681],[RFC3393],[RFC7679],[RFC7680],[RFC3630], [RFC3784], [RFC3393], [RFC7679], [RFC7680], [RFC3630], [RFC3784], [RFC7471],
[RFC7471], [RFC7810], [RFC7752] and [BGP-PM] that allow an ALTO [RFC7810], [RFC7752] and [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] that allow an ALTO
Server to retrieve and derive the necessary information to compute Server to retrieve and derive the necessary information to compute
the metrics that we describe in this document. the metrics that we describe in this document.
One challenge lies in the data sources originating the ALTO metric One challenge lies in the data sources originating the ALTO metric
values. The very important purpose of ALTO is to guide application values. The very important purpose of ALTO is to guide application
traffic with provider network centric information that may be exposed traffic with provider network centric information that may be exposed
to ALTO Clients in the form of network performance metric values. to ALTO Clients in the form of network performance metric values.
Not all of these metrics have values produced by standardized Not all of these metrics have values produced by standardized
measurement methods or routing protocols. Some of them involve measurement methods or routing protocols. Some of them involve
provider-centric policy considerations. Some of them may describe provider-centric policy considerations. Some of them may describe
skipping to change at page 5, line 39 skipping to change at page 5, line 39
applications while preserving provider privacy, ALTO performance applications while preserving provider privacy, ALTO performance
metric values may also add abstraction to measurements or provide metric values may also add abstraction to measurements or provide
unitless performance scores. unitless performance scores.
2.2. ALTO performance metrics Computation Challenges 2.2. ALTO performance metrics Computation Challenges
The metric values exposed by an ALTO server may result from The metric values exposed by an ALTO server may result from
additional processing on measurements from data sources to compute additional processing on measurements from data sources to compute
exposed metrics. This may involve data processing tasks such as exposed metrics. This may involve data processing tasks such as
aggregating the results across multiple systems, removing outliers, aggregating the results across multiple systems, removing outliers,
and creating additional statistics. There are two challenges on and creating additional statistics. There are two challenges on the
computation of ALTO performance metrics. computation of ALTO performance metrics.
2.2.1. Configuration Parameters Challenge 2.2.1. Configuration Parameters Challenge
Performance metrics often depend on configuration parameters. For Performance metrics often depend on configuration parameters. For
example, the value of packet loss rate depends on the measurement example, the value of packet loss rate depends on the measurement
interval and varies over time. To handle this issue, an ALTO server interval and varies over time. To handle this issue, an ALTO server
may collect data on time periods covering the previous and current may collect data on time periods covering the previous and current
time or only collect data on present time. The ALTO server may time or only collect data on present time. The ALTO server may
further aggregate these data to provide an abstract and unified view further aggregate these data to provide an abstract and unified view
that can be more useful to applications. To make the ALTO client that can be more useful to applications. To make the ALTO client
better understand how to use these performance data, the ALTO server better understand how to use these performance data, the ALTO server
may provide the client with the validity period of the exposed metric may provide the client with the validity period of the exposed metric
values. values.
2.2.2. Availability of end to end path values Challenge 2.2.2. Availability of end to end path values Challenge
Applications value information relating to bandwidth availability Applications value information relating to bandwidth availability
where as bandwidth related metrics can often be only measured at the whereas bandwidth related metrics can often be only measured at the
link level. This document specifies a set of link-level bandwidth link level. This document specifies a set of link-level bandwidth
related values that may be exposed as such by an ALTO server. The related values that may be exposed as such by an ALTO server. The
server may also expose other metrics derived from their aggregation server may also expose other metrics derived from their aggregation
and having different levels of endpoint granularity, e.g. link and having different levels of endpoint granularity, e.g., link
endpoints or session endpoints. The metric specifications may also endpoints or session endpoints. The metric specifications may also
expose the utilized aggregation laws. expose the utilized aggregation laws.
3. Cost Metric: OWDelay 3. Network Performance Cost Metrics
This section introduces generic ALTO network performance metrics such
as one way delay,round trip delay,hop count,packet loss,throughput
derived and aggregated from routing protocols or from end to end
traffic management tools.
3.1. Cost Metric: OWDelay
Metric name: Metric name:
One Way Delay One Way Delay
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal aggregated delay of a stream of To specify spatial and temporal aggregated delay of a stream of
packets exchanged between the specified source and destination or packets exchanged between the specified source and destination or
the time that the packet spends to travel from source to the time that the packet spends to travel from source to
skipping to change at page 8, line 22 skipping to change at page 8, line 22
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map" : { "endpoint-cost-map" : {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": { "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 10, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 10,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34" : 20, "ipv4:198.51.100.34" : 20,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 30, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 30,
} }
} }
} }
4. Cost Metric: RTT 3.2. Cost Metric: RTT
Metric name: Metric name:
Round Trip Delay Round Trip Delay
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal aggregated round trip delay To specify spatial and temporal aggregated round trip delay
between the specified source and destination or the time that the between the specified source and destination or the time that the
packet spends to travel from source to destination and then from packet spends to travel from source to destination and then from
skipping to change at page 10, line 22 skipping to change at page 10, line 22
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map" : { "endpoint-cost-map" : {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": { "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 4, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 4,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34" : 3, "ipv4:198.51.100.34" : 3,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 2, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 2,
} }
} }
} }
5. Cost Metric: PDV 3.3. Cost Metric: PDV
Metric name: Metric name:
Packet Delay Variation Packet Delay Variation
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal aggregated jitter (packet delay To specify spatial and temporal aggregated jitter (packet delay
variation) with respect to the minimum delay observed on the variation) with respect to the minimum delay observed on the
stream over the specified source and destination. The spatial stream over the specified source and destination. The spatial
skipping to change at page 12, line 44 skipping to change at page 12, line 44
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map": { "endpoint-cost-map": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": { "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0 "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0
"ipv4:198.51.100.34" : 1 "ipv4:198.51.100.34" : 1
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 5 "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 5
} }
} }
} }
6. Cost Metric: Hop Count 3.4. Cost Metric: Hop Count
The metric hopcount is mentioned in [ALTO] as an example. This The metric hopcount is mentioned in [RFC7285] section 9.2.3 as an
section further clarifies its properties. example. This section further clarifies its properties.
Metric name: Metric name:
Hop count Hop count
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify the number of hops in the path between the source To specify the number of hops in the path between the source
endpoint and the destination endpoint. The hop count is a basic endpoint and the destination endpoint. The hop count is a basic
measurement of distance in a network and can be exposed as Router measurement of distance in a network and can be exposed as Router
Hops, IP hops in direct relation to the routing protocols Hops, in direct relation to the routing protocols originating this
originating this information. It might also result from the information.
aggregation of such information.
Method of Measurement or Calculation: Method of Measurement or Calculation:
The hop count can and calculated based on the number of routers The hop count can be calculated based on the number of routers
from the source endpoint through which data must pass to reach the from the source endpoint through which data must pass to reach the
destination endpoint. destination endpoint.
Units of Measurement: Units of Measurement:
The unit is integer number. The unit is integer number.
Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain:
The hop count can be measured at the source endpoint by The hop count can be measured at the source endpoint by
skipping to change at page 14, line 45 skipping to change at page 14, line 45
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map": { "endpoint-cost-map": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": { "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 5, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 5,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34": 3, "ipv4:198.51.100.34": 3,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 2, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 2,
} }
} }
} }
7. Cost Metric: Packet Loss 3.5. Cost Metric: Packet Loss
Metric name: Metric name:
Packet loss Packet loss
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal aggregated packet loss over the To specify spatial and temporal aggregated packet loss over the
specified source and destination. The spatial aggregation level specified source and destination. The spatial aggregation level
is specified in the query context (e.g., PID to PID, or endpoint is specified in the query context (e.g., PID to PID, or endpoint
skipping to change at page 16, line 45 skipping to change at page 16, line 45
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map": { "endpoint-cost-map": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": { "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34": 0, "ipv4:198.51.100.34": 0,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 0, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 0,
} }
} }
} }
8. Cost Metric: Throughput 3.6. Cost Metric: Throughput
Metric name: Metric name:
Throughput Throughput
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal throughput over the specified To specify spatial and temporal throughput over the specified
source and destination. The spatial aggregation level is source and destination. The spatial aggregation level is
specified in the query context (e.g., PID to PID, or endpoint to specified in the query context (e.g., PID to PID, or endpoint to
skipping to change at page 18, line 46 skipping to change at page 18, line 46
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map": { "endpoint-cost-map": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2": { "ipv4:192.0.2.2": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 25.6, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 25.6,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34": 12.8, "ipv4:198.51.100.34": 12.8,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 42.8, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd" : 42.8,
} }
} }
} }
9. Traffic Engineering Performance Cost Metrics 4. Traffic Engineering Performance Cost Metrics
This section introduces ALTO network performance metrics that may be This section introduces ALTO network performance metrics that may be
aggregated from network metrics measured on links and specified in aggregated from network metrics measured on links and specified in
other documents. In particular, the bandwidth related metrics other documents. In particular, the bandwidth related metrics
specified in this section are only available through link level specified in this section are only available through link level
measurements. For some of these metrics, the ALTO Server may further measurements. For some of these metrics, the ALTO Server may further
expose aggregated values while specifying the aggregation laws. expose aggregated values while specifying the aggregation laws.
9.1. Cost Metric: Link Maximum Reservable Bandwidth 4.1. Cost Metric: Link Maximum Reservable Bandwidth
Metric name: Metric name:
Maximum Reservable Bandwidth Maximum Reservable Bandwidth
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal maximum reservable bandwidth over To specify spatial and temporal maximum reservable bandwidth over
the specified source and destination. The value is corresponding the specified source and destination. The value is corresponding
to the maximum bandwidth that can be reserved (motivated from RFC to the maximum bandwidth that can be reserved (motivated from RFC
3630 Sec. 2.5.7.). The spatial aggregation unit is specified in 3630 Sec. 2.5.7.). The spatial aggregation unit is specified in
the query context (e.g., PID to PID, or endpoint to endpoint). the query context (e.g., PID to PID, or endpoint to endpoint).
Method of Measurement or Calculation: Method of Measurement or Calculation:
Maximum Reserveable Bandwidth is the bandwidth measured between Maximum Reservable Bandwidth is the bandwidth measured between two
two directly connected IS-IS neighbors or OSPF neighbors, See directly connected IS-IS neighbors or OSPF neighbors, See section
section 3.5 of [RFC5305] for Measurement Method. 3.5 of [RFC5305] for Measurement Method.
Units of Measurement: Units of Measurement:
The unit of measurement is byte per seconds. The unit of measurement is byte per seconds.
Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain: Measurement Point(s) with Potential Measurement Domain:
See section 2.1, Data sources. See section 2.1, Data sources.
Measurement Timing: Measurement Timing:
skipping to change at page 20, line 45 skipping to change at page 20, line 45
}, },
" endpoint-cost-map": { " endpoint-cost-map": {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2" { "ipv4:192.0.2.2" {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34": 2000, "ipv4:198.51.100.34": 2000,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd": 5000, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd": 5000,
} }
} }
} }
9.2. Cost Metric: Link Residue Bandwidth 4.2. Cost Metric: Link Residue Bandwidth
Metric name: Metric name:
Residue Bandwidth Residue Bandwidth
Metric Description: Metric Description:
To specify spatial and temporal residual bandwidth over the To specify spatial and temporal residual bandwidth over the
specified source and destination. The value is calculated by specified source and destination. The value is calculated by
subtracting tunnel reservations from Maximum Bandwidth (motivated subtracting tunnel reservations from Maximum Bandwidth (motivated
skipping to change at page 22, line 45 skipping to change at page 22, line 45
}, },
"endpoint-cost-map" { "endpoint-cost-map" {
"ipv4:192.0.2.2" { "ipv4:192.0.2.2" {
"ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0, "ipv4:192.0.2.89" : 0,
"ipv4:198.51.100.34": 2000, "ipv4:198.51.100.34": 2000,
"ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd": 5000, "ipv6:2000::1:2345:6789:abcd": 5000,
} }
} }
} }
10. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
The properties defined in this document present no security The properties defined in this document present no security
considerations beyond those in Section 15 of the base ALTO considerations beyond those in Section 15 of the base ALTO
specification [ALTO]. specification [RFC7285].
However concerns addressed in Sections "15.1 Authenticity and However concerns addressed in Sections "15.1 Authenticity and
Integrity of ALTO Information", "15.2 Potential Undesirable Guidance Integrity of ALTO Information", "15.2 Potential Undesirable Guidance
from Authenticated ALTO Information" and "15.3 Confidentiality of from Authenticated ALTO Information" and "15.3 Confidentiality of
ALTO Information" remain of utmost importance. Indeed, TE ALTO Information" remain of utmost importance. Indeed, TE
performance is a highly sensitive ISP information, therefore, sharing performance is a highly sensitive ISP information, therefore, sharing
TE metric values in numerical mode requires full mutual confidence TE metric values in numerical mode requires full mutual confidence
between the entities managing the ALTO Server and Client. Numerical between the entities managing the ALTO Server and Client. Numerical
TE performance information will most likely be distributed by ALTO TE performance information will most likely be distributed by ALTO
Servers to Clients under strict and formal mutual trust agreements. Servers to Clients under strict and formal mutual trust agreements.
On the other hand, ALTO Clients must be cognizant on the risks On the other hand, ALTO Clients must be cognizant on the risks
attached to such information that they would have acquired outside attached to such information that they would have acquired outside
formal conditions of mutual trust. formal conditions of mutual trust.
11. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
IANA has created and now maintains the "ALTO Cost Metric Registry", IANA has created and now maintains the "ALTO Cost Metric Registry",
listed in Section 14.2, Table 3 of [RFC7285]. This registry is listed in Section 14.2, Table 3 of [RFC7285]. This registry is
located at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/alto-protocol/alto- located at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/alto-protocol/alto-
protocol.xhtml#cost-metrics>. This document requests to add the protocol.xhtml#cost-metrics>. This document requests to add the
following entries to "ALTO Cost Meric Registry". following entries to "ALTO Cost Meric Registry".
+----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+ +----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+
|Namespace | Property | Reference | |Namespace | Property | Reference |
+----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+ +----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+
| | owdelay | [thisdraft] Section 3,[RFC2679] Section 3.6 | | | owdelay | [thisdraft] Section 3,[RFC2679] Section 3.6 |
| | rtt | [thisdraft] Section 4,[RFC2681],Section 2.6 | | | rtt | [thisdraft] Section 4,[RFC2681],Section 2.6 |
| | pdv | [thisdraft] Section 5,[RFC3393],Section 2.6 | | | pdv | [thisdraft] Section 5,[RFC3393],Section 2.6 |
| | hopcount | [thisdraft] Section 6,[RFC7285] | | | hopcount | [thisdraft] Section 6,[RFC7285] |
| | pktloss | [thisdraft] Section 7,[RFC7680],Section 2.6 | | | pktloss | [thisdraft] Section 7,[RFC7680],Section 2.6 |
| | throughput | [thisdraft],[RFC6349],Section3.3 | | | throughput | [thisdraft],[RFC6349],Section3.3 |
| | maxresbw | [thisdraft] Section 8.1,[RFC5305],Section 3.5| | | maxresbw | [thisdraft] Section 8.1,[RFC5305],Section 3.5|
| | residbw | [thisdraft] Section 8.2,[RFC7810],Section 4.5| | | residbw | [thisdraft] Section 8.2,[RFC7810],Section 4.5|
+----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+ +----------+------------+----------------------------------------------+
12. References 7. Acknowledgments
12.1. Normative References The authors of this document would also like to thank Brian
Trammell,Haizhou Du,Kai Gao,Lili Liu, Li, Geng, Danny Alex Lachos
Perez for the review and comments.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp] [I-D.ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp]
Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., Wu, Q., Tantsura, J., and C. Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., Wu, Q., Tantsura, J., and C.
Filsfils, "BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering Filsfils, "BGP-LS Advertisement of IGP Traffic Engineering
Performance Metric Extensions", draft-ietf-idr-te-pm- Performance Metric Extensions", draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-
bgp-14 (work in progress), October 2018. bgp-14 (work in progress), October 2018.
[I-D.ietf-ippm-initial-registry] [I-D.ietf-ippm-initial-registry]
Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Eardley, P., and K. D'Souza, Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Eardley, P., and K. D'Souza,
"Initial Performance Metric Registry Entries", draft-ietf- "Initial Performance Metric Registry Entries", draft-ietf-
ippm-initial-registry-07 (work in progress), June 2018. ippm-initial-registry-08 (work in progress), October 2018.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", March 1997. Requirement Levels", March 1997.
[RFC2679] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way [RFC2679] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way
Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2679, DOI 10.17487/RFC2679, Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2679, DOI 10.17487/RFC2679,
September 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2679>. September 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2679>.
[RFC2681] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A Round-trip [RFC2681] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A Round-trip
Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2681, DOI 10.17487/RFC2681, Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2681, DOI 10.17487/RFC2681,
skipping to change at page 25, line 26 skipping to change at page 25, line 31
S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752, Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016, DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
[RFC7810] Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and [RFC7810] Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and
Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions", Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions",
RFC 7810, DOI 10.17487/RFC7810, May 2016, RFC 7810, DOI 10.17487/RFC7810, May 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7810>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7810>.
12.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-alto-deployments]
Stiemerling, M., Kiesel, S., Scharf, M., Seidel, H., and
S. Previdi, "ALTO Deployment Considerations", draft-ietf-
alto-deployments-16 (work in progress), July 2016.
[RFC6390] Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric [RFC6390] Clark, A. and B. Claise, "Framework for Performance Metric
Development", RFC 6390, July 2011. Development", RFC 6390, July 2011.
[RFC7971] Stiemerling, M., Kiesel, S., Scharf, M., Seidel, H., and
S. Previdi, "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO)
Deployment Considerations", RFC 7971,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7971, October 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7971>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Qin Wu Qin Wu
Huawei Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District 101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012 Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012
China China
Email: bill.wu@huawei.com Email: bill.wu@huawei.com
Y. Richard Yang Y. Richard Yang
 End of changes. 36 change blocks. 
63 lines changed or deleted 79 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/