On Mon, 6 Oct 2008, IESG Secretary wrote:
- A requirements document. This document will list requirements for
the ALTO service, identifying, for example, what kind of information
P2P applications will need for optimizing their choices.
...
I believe this work could be useful and would provide an improvement
over existing p2p usage and traffic management.
I'd be more comfortable with this effort if a recharter (this is a
rather lightweight process) was needed after finishing the problem
statement and the requirements. It would also encourage that people
actually put some serious work on those before diving into solutions
:-)
There are significant design issues that will come up in the protocols
and I'd expect that it would be helpful if those had already been
dealt with in the requirements phase.
For example, the current req document has:
REQ. 4: ALTO Clients MUST be able to find out where to send ALTO
queries.
.. and the charter lists DHCP option or SRV record as examples. Both
of these have issues in certain contexts. For example, must this
discovery mechanism work across unmodified NAT boxes? DHCP option
doesn't; SRV record in many contexts doesn't either (or otherwise
you'll end up with the same "how to you discover the domain name under
which you should look?" problem).
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf