One document matched: draft-roome-alto-incr-updates-00.txt




ALTO                                                            W. Roome
Internet-Draft                                            Alcatel-Lucent
Intended status: Standards Track                               N. Schwan
Expires: August 17, 2014                              Thales Deutschland
                                                       February 13, 2014


                        ALTO Incremental Updates
                    draft-roome-alto-incr-updates-00

Abstract

   The goal of Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) is to
   bridge the gap between network and applications by provisioning
   network related information.  This allows applications to make
   informed decisions, for example when selecting a target host from a
   set of candidates.

   Therefore an ALTO server provides network and cost maps to its
   clients.  However, those maps can be very large, and portions of
   those maps may change frequently (the cost map in particular).

   This draft presents a method to provide incremental updates for these
   maps.  The goal is to reduce the load on the ALTO client and server
   by transmitting just the updated portions of those maps.


























Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


Requirements Language

   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].

Status of this Memo

   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 August 17, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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.














Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Issues With Incremental Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     2.1.  Communication Mechanism  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     2.2.  How Often To Poll  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     2.3.  Version Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     2.4.  Message Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.  Incremental Update Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     3.1.  Date and Expires HTTP Headers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     3.2.  Extensions to Cost Map Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     3.3.  Incremental Network Map Update Service . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.3.1.  Media Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.3.2.  HTTP Method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.3.3.  Accept Input Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       3.3.4.  Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       3.3.5.  Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       3.3.6.  Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       3.3.7.  Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       3.3.8.  Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     3.4.  Incremental Cost Map Update Service  . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.1.  Media Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.2.  HTTP Method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.3.  Accept Input Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.4.  Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.5.  Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.6.  Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.4.7.  Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       3.4.8.  Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   4.  Impact On Existing ALTO Clients  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   5.  Server Update Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   6.  Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     6.1.  HTTP Conditional Retrieval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     6.2.  JSON Patch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   8.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   9.  Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25











Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


1.  Introduction

   The goal of Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) is to
   bridge the gap between network and applications by provisioning
   network related information.  This allows applications to make
   informed decisions, for example when selecting a target host from a
   set of candidates.  Typical applications are file sharing, real-time
   communication and live streaming peer-to-peer networks [RFC5693] as
   well as Content Distribution Networks
   [I-D.jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases].

   The ALTO protocol [I-D.ietf-alto-protocol] is a client-server
   protocol based on the HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP) and encoded
   in JavaScript Object Notation (JSON).  An ALTO server provides
   several services, two of which are relavent to this draft.

   The ALTO Network Map Service makes the large space of endpoint
   addresses manageable by partitioning them into a small set of
   equivalence classes, called Provider-defined Identifiers, or PIDs.
   Each PID is defined by a set of endpoint address prefixes, or CIDRs
   [RFC4632].  The ALTO Server defines PIDs it sees fit.  Some servers
   might define a fine-grained Network Map with thousands of PIDs, while
   others might define a course-grained Map with tens of PIDs.  The only
   requirement is that the network costs for all endpoints in a PID are
   similar.

   The ALTO Cost Map Service presents the unidirectional network cost
   between each pair of PIDs.  Costs are numeric and non-negative, but
   an ALTO Server may omit unknown costs.  Essentially a Cost Map is a
   sparse NxN matrix, where N is the number of PIDs in the Network Map.

   The size of these maps depends primarily on the number of PIDs the
   ALTO Server choses to define.  Because they go with the square of the
   number of PIDs, Cost Maps in particular can become very large.  As an
   example, a Network Map with 5,000 PIDs, each with 10 CIDRs, is
   roughly 1.25 megabytes.  A fully specified Cost Map for 5,000 PIDs
   takes up to 417 megabytes.

   These maps may change at any time.  Although not a protocol
   requirement, we expect that for many ALTO Servers, the Cost Map will
   change much more frequently than the Network Map. For example, the
   Cost Map might change every few minutes, as opposed to hours, if not
   days, between changes to the Network Map. However, we expect that
   only a small portion of these maps will change at any given time.

   Thus with the base ALTO protocol, if a client wishes to maintain an
   up-to-date copy of the Network and Cost Maps, it must fetch a large
   amount of data very frequently, even though only a small fraction of



Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


   that data will have changed.  This puts additional load on the ALTO
   Server, the ALTO Client and the network.  This draft presents an
   extension to the ALTO protocol to allow a client to fetch just the
   updated portion of those maps.

   Comments and discussions about this memo should be directed to the
   ALTO working group: alto@ietf.org.












































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


2.  Issues With Incremental Update

   There are several issues involved in extending ALTO to allow
   incremental updates:

2.1.  Communication Mechanism

   The issue is how does the server send incremental updates to the
   client?  The two basic approaches are "server push", where the server
   sends updates to the client when they become available, versus
   "client pull", where the client periodically asks the server to send
   any changes.

   In general, "server-push" is more efficient than "client-pull".
   However, ALTO is an HTTP-based protocol, and HTTP is a "client-pull"
   protocol.  While there have been proposals to extend HTTP with push-
   like features, they tend to be fragile.  Hence we will only consider
   solutions in which the client periodically polls the server via
   simple HTTP requests.

2.2.  How Often To Poll

   The next issue is how often should a client check the server for
   updates?  The simplest solution is to use the HTTP Expires header
   ([RFC2616]).  The full Network Map and Cost Map services return that
   header in the response, as a guideline for the client as to when to
   check for updates.

   An alternative would be to add an "expires" field to the "meta"
   section of the response message, so the expiration date stays with
   the message body instead of being in the HTTP headers.

2.3.  Version Specification

   When requesting incremental updates, the client must tell the server
   what version the client has.  Rather than inventing a new mechanism
   for that, we propose extending the ALTO protocol's "version tag"
   concept.  The base protocol requires an ALTO Server to assign a
   unique id ("tag") to the Network Map, and update the tag every time
   the Network Map changes.  We will extend that concept to Cost Maps as
   well.

2.4.  Message Format

   The final question is how to represent an incremental update.
   Fortunately the ALTO Network Map and Cost Map response messages work
   very nicely to describe incremental updates; the client can update
   the PIDs and cost pairs in the message, and leave the other data as



Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


   is.

   JSON Patch ([RFC6902]) can also represent incremental changes.
   However, as described in Section 6.2, the existing Network and Cost
   Map messages are more appropriate.














































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


3.  Incremental Update Extensions

   Incremental update involves two new services, and extensions to the
   base protocol's Network Map and Cost Map services.

3.1.  Date and Expires HTTP Headers

   If an ALTO Server supports incremental update for a Network Map or
   Cost Map Service, the server SHOULD return the HTTP Date and Expires
   headers with the response for those services, as a suggestion to the
   ALTO Client as to when to poll the ALTO Server for an incremental
   update.  If the server does not provide those headers, the client
   SHOULD make a reasonable guess.

3.2.  Extensions to Cost Map Service

   If an ALTO Server supports incremental update for a Cost Map Service,
   the server MUST assign a "version tag" ("vtag") to each version of
   the Cost Map. As with Network Map vtags, the server MUST change the
   tag whenever any cost in the map changes.  The ALTO Server puts the
   tag in the "meta" section of the response message, just as it does
   for a Network Map response.

   When the Network Map changes -- that is, when the ALTO Server assigns
   a new tag to the Network Map -- the ALTO Server MUST assign a new tag
   to the Cost Map, even if no costs change.

   For example, a Cost Map response would look something like this:

       HTTP/1.1 200 OK
       Date: TBA
       Expires: TBA
       Content-Length: TBA
       Content-Type: application/alto-costmap+json

       {
           "meta": {
               "vtag":
                   {"resource-id": "numerical-routing-cost-map",
                    "tag": "3141592653"},
               "dependent-vtags" : [
                   {"resource-id": "my-default-network-map",
                    "tag": "1266506139"}
                 ],
               "cost-type" : {"cost-mode": "numerical",
                              "cost-metric": "routingcost"}
               },
           "cost-map": { .... }



Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


       }

   This addition is only required for Cost Map resources for which the
   ALTO Server chooses to offer incremental updates.

   The Filtered Cost Map Service MUST not return the Cost Map vtag.  If
   the client maintains a copy of the Full Cost Map, the client MUST NOT
   save the Filtered Cost Map costs in that table.

   The reason is that Full and Filtered Cost Map Services may return
   inconsistent costs.  For example, the costs returned by the Filtered
   Cost Map Service map be the may be more up-to-date than the costs
   returned by the Full Cost Map Service (see Section 5).  This
   inconsistency is inherent in the base ALTO protocol, because an ALTO
   Server may update costs at any time.  We do not believe this
   inconsistency will be a problem, because very few clients will use
   both the Full and Filtered Cost Map Services.  That is, some clients,
   especially high-volume clients, will fetch and save the Full Cost
   Map, and use that to calculate costs as needed.  These clients will
   use the incremental update service we describe to get changes to the
   full Cost Map. Other clients will use the Filtered Cost Map Service
   whenever they need to evaluate costs.  These clients will not bother
   to fetch and save the Full Cost Map.

3.3.  Incremental Network Map Update Service

   This new service returns the changes between current Network Map and
   a version previously retrieved by the client.

3.3.1.  Media Type

   The media type is "application/alto-networkmap+json", the same as for
   a Full or Filtered Network Map.

3.3.2.  HTTP Method

   An Incremental Network Map Update is requested using the HTTP POST
   method.

3.3.3.  Accept Input Parameters

   An ALTO Client supplies the vtag of the previous version by
   specifying media type "application/alto-vtag+json" with an HTTP POST
   body containing a JSON object of type VersionTag, as defined in
   Section 10.3 of [I-D.ietf-alto-protocol]:






Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


       object {
           ResourceID resource-id;
           JSONString tag;
       } VersionTag;

3.3.4.  Capabilities

   None.

3.3.5.  Uses

   The Resource ID of the Network Map for which this resource supplies
   incremental updates.

3.3.6.  Response

   The "meta" field of an Incremental Network Map Update response MUST
   include the "vtag" key with the latest version of the Network Map.
   The "resource-id" is for the Full Network Map Service, not the
   Incremental Update Service.  In other words, the Incremental Update
   Service returns the same "vtag" that the Full Network Map Service
   would return.

   The "meta" field MUST also include a "dependent-vtags" key with the
   "resource-id" of the Full Network Map Service and the "tag" of the
   client's current version.  Thus the body of the response contains the
   changes from the "dependent-vtags" version to the "vtag" version.

   The body of the response has the new definition of every PID that
   changed between the old version and the current version.  PIDs not
   mentioned in the body keep the same set of prefixes as before.  Note
   there is no provision for partial update of a PID; if a prefix is
   added to a PID, the Incremental Update response MUST include all
   prefixes for that PID.

   There is no provision for deleting a PID.  However, Incremental
   Update can give zero-length array of prefixes for a PID, which
   essentially deletes it.

   If the version supplied by the client is still current, the "network-
   map" body will be empty, and the "tag" in "vtag" will be the same as
   the tag supplied by the client.

   If the client's tag is invalid, or if it is so old that the ALTO
   Server is unable to provide incremental updates relative to that
   version, the ALTO Server MUST return an E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE error
   response.  The client SHOULD then use the Full Network Map Service to
   retrieve the latest version.



Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


   As with the Full Cost Map service, the Incremental Cost Map Update
   response SHOULD include the HTTP Date and Expires headers, as a hint
   to the client as to when to request another incremental update.

3.3.7.  Example

   In this example, the Incremental Network Map Update Service reports
   that PID1 now has one prefix, and PID2 is no longer in use.

   POST /networkmap/incremental HTTP/1.1
   Host: custom.alto.example.com
   Content-Length: TBA
   Content-Type: application/alto-vtag+json
   Accept: application/alto-networkmap+json,application/alto-error+json

   {"vtag": {"resource-id": "NETWORK-MAP-ID", "tag": "OLD-TAG"}}


   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Date: TBA
   Expires: TBA
   Content-Length: TBA
   Content-Type: application/alto-networkmap+json

   {
       "meta": {
            "vtag":
                 {"resource-id": "NETWORK-MAP-ID", "tag": "NEW-TAG"},
            "dependent-vtags":
                 [{"resource-id": "NETWORK-MAP-ID", tag: "OLD-TAG"}]
             },
        "network-map": {
            "PID1": {"ipv4": ["192.0.2.0/24"]},
            "PID2": {}
            }
   }

3.3.8.  Comments

   A client can discover the Incremental Update Service for a given
   Network Map by looking for a resource that uses the desired Network
   Map resource, returns the media type "application/
   alto-networkmap+json", and accepts the media type "application/
   alto-vtag+json".







Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 11]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


3.4.  Incremental Cost Map Update Service

   This new service returns the changes between the current Cost Map and
   a version previously retrieved by the client.

3.4.1.  Media Type

   The media type is "application/alto-costmap+json", the same as for a
   Full or Filtered Cost Map.

3.4.2.  HTTP Method

   An Incremental Cost Map Update is requested using the HTTP POST
   method.

3.4.3.  Accept Input Parameters

   An ALTO Client supplies the vtag of the previous version by
   specifying media type "application/alto-vtag+json" with an HTTP POST
   body containing a JSON object of type VersionTag, as defined in
   Section 10.3 of [I-D.ietf-alto-protocol]:

       object {
           ResourceID resource-id;
           JSONString tag;
       } VersionTag;

3.4.4.  Capabilities

   None.

3.4.5.  Uses

   The Resource ID of the Cost Map for which this resource supplies
   incremental updates.  An Incremental Cost Map Update resource MUST
   NOT list a Network Map resource.  The Network Map is implicit in the
   "uses" list of the Cost Map resource.

3.4.6.  Response

   The "meta" field of an Incremental Cost Map Update response MUST
   include the "vtag" key with the latest version of the Cost Map. The
   "resource-id" is for the Full Cost Map Service, not the Incremental
   Update Service; the Incremental Update Service returns the same
   "vtag" that the Full Cost Map Service would return.

   The "meta" field MUST also include a "dependent-vtags" key with the
   vtag of the client's version of the Cost Map, to indicate that the



Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 12]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


   body of the response contains the changes from the "dependent-vtags"
   version to the "vtag" version.

   "dependent-vtags" must also include the vtag of the version of the
   Network Map resource that defines the PIDs in this Cost Map.

   The body of the response has the cost points that changed between the
   old version and the current version.  Costs not mentioned in the body
   keep the same values as before.  The ALTO Server may set a cost to
   -1, to indicate that the cost for that source/destination pair is no
   longer known.

   If the version supplied by the client is still current, the "network-
   map" body will be empty, and the "tag" in "vtag" will be the same as
   the tag supplied by the client.

   If the client's tag is invalid, or if it is so old that the ALTO
   Server is unable to provide incremental updates relative to that
   version, the ALTO Server MUST return an E_INVALID_FIELD_VALUE error
   response.  The client MUST use the Full Cost Map Service to retrieve
   the latest version.

   As with the Full Network Map service, the Incremental Network Map
   Update response SHOULD include the HTTP Date and Expires headers, as
   a hint to the client as to when to request another incremental
   update.

3.4.7.  Example

   In this example, the Incremental Cost Map Update Service reports that
   the cost from PID1 to PID2 is 10, and the cost from PID1 to PID99 is
   no longer available.  All other costs remain the same as before.



















Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 13]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


   POST /costmap/num/routingcost/incremental HTTP/1.1
   Host: custom.alto.example.com
   Content-Length: TBA
   Content-Type: application/alto-vtag+json
   Accept: application/alto-costmap+json,application/alto-error+json

   {"vtag": {"resource-id": "COST-MAP-ID", "tag": "OLD-CM-TAG"}}


   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Date: TBA
   Expires: TBA
   Content-Length: TBA
   Content-Type: application/alto-costmap+json

   {
        "meta": {
             "vtag":
                 {"resource-id": "COST-MAP-ID", "tag": "NEW-CM-TAG"},
             "dependent-vtags": [
                 {"resource-id": "COST-MAP-D", tag: "OLD-CM-TAG"},
                 {"resource-id": "NETWORK-MAP-ID", tag: "OLD-NM-TAG"}
               ]
             },
        "cost-map": {
             "PID1": {"PID2": 10, "PID99": -1}
             }
   }

3.4.8.  Comments

   A client can discover the Incremental Update Service for a given Cost
   Map by looking for a resource that uses the desired Cost Map
   resource, returns the media type "application/alto-costmap+json", and
   accepts the media type "application/alto-vtag+json".

   The Incremental Cost Map Update Service is independent of the
   Incremental Network Map Update Service.  An ALTO Server can implement
   one without the other.












Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 14]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


4.  Impact On Existing ALTO Clients

   The incremental update services do not affect clients who are not
   aware of this extension.  According to the ALTO protocol, clients are
   required to ignore fields that are not defined in the base protocol,
   so existing clients should ignore the new version tag in the Cost Map
   response.  Similarly, clients who are not aware of the new
   incremental update services will simply ignore those resources in the
   Information Resource Directory.










































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 15]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


5.  Server Update Model

   While this extension does not dictate how an ALTO Server would
   implement incremental updates, it is useful to outline one possible
   strategy.

   First we will consider cost map updates.  We start by assuming
   updates arrive individually rather than en masse.  That is, if there
   are 1,000 PIDs, cost updates trickle in a few at a time, rather than
   all 1,000,000 costs arriving in one batch.

   The server keeps two copies of the Cost Map: a "frozen" version and a
   "latest" version.  The server also keeps a "change log" with the
   differences.  The frozen version has a tag, the latest version does
   not.  The Full Cost Map Service uses the frozen map, while the
   Filtered Cost Map Service uses the latest map.

   As cost updates arrive, the server immediately applies them to the
   latest version, and saves the updated cost points in the change log.
   When the change log becomes large enough, the server applies all the
   logged updates to the frozen version, and assigns it a new tag.

   Thus the frozen version of the Cost Map is updated in well defined
   steps.  Each step has a tag as the version id, and the change logs
   contain the incremental changes between each version.

   The server keeps the old change logs in a FIFO list indexed by the
   Cost Map version tags.  That is, if tags are "1", "2", etc, then the
   change log for version "1" has the changes from "1" to "2", the
   change log for version "2" has the changes from "2" to "3", etc.
   When these logs take up too much space, the server deletes the oldest
   change logs.  When a client requests an incremental update, the
   server finds the change log for the client's tag, and returns all
   cost updates in that log and all subsequent logs.  If the server
   cannot find the client's tag in the change log table, the server
   returns an "invalid field" error code, and the client must retrieve
   the full Cost Map to get the updated costs.  This covers the error
   cases of the tag being totally invalid as well as being too old.

   We divide network map updates into two categories.  Minor updates
   move some prefixes from one PID to another, perhaps to reflect
   temporary rerouting, but do not change the PID names.  Major updates
   change PID names, add or delete PIDs, etc.

   An ALTO Server can handle minor updates by keeping change logs with
   the prefixes for the updated PIDs, as described above for cost maps.
   When a client requests an incremental update, logically concatenate
   the logs from the client's tag to the current version.



Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 16]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


   For major network map changes, the server could just refuse to
   provide incremental updates.  That is, when there is a major network
   map change, the server would simply discard all the old change logs.

   Also, note that the Incremental Network Map Update Service is
   independent of the Incremental Cost Map Update Service.  An ALTO
   Server may choose to provide Incremental Cost Map Updates without
   providing Incremental Network Map Updates.











































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 17]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


6.  Alternatives

   This section presents several alternative approaches, and explains
   why we do not think they are appropriate.

6.1.  HTTP Conditional Retrieval

   The HTTP Protocol ([RFC2616]) defines several conditional-retrieval
   mechanisms, such as the If-Modified-Since and If-None-Match headers.
   These allow a client to retrieve a new version of a map only if the
   resource has changed since the client's last access.

   However, these mechanisms do not allow incremental update.  If only a
   few costs changed, the server would still have to send the entire
   map.  Because we expect that parts of the maps will change
   frequently, we do not think these approaches are satisfactory.

6.2.  JSON Patch

   A more promising alternative is JSON Patch ([RFC6902]).  This is a
   standardized method of describing the changes between two versions of
   a JSON data structure.  As such, it is ideally suited for incremental
   update.  When a client requests an incremental update from the
   server, the server would return a JSON Patch description of the
   changes.  Presumably JSON libraries will provide procedures to apply
   a patch to an previously retrieved JSON data structure, and to create
   a patch describing the differences between two versions of a JSON
   data structure.  Clients can use the former methods to apply patches,
   and servers can use the latter to create them, so little additional
   programming is required.

   Despite those advantages, we do not believe JSON Patch is a good
   solution for incremental update for ALTO.  First, note that the
   existing ALTO Network and Cost Map response messages are, for all
   practical purposes, "patch" structures.  All that is needed is the
   semantics that they represent changes to an existing map, rather than
   a completely new map.  It is true that JSON Patch can represent a
   wider class of changes, but it is not clear that power is necessary
   for the incremental changes that an ALTO Server will make.

   Next, JSON Patch is less efficient than our proposal.  For example,
   suppose the cost for SRC-PID to DEST-PID changes to 123.  Our
   proposal represents that as:

        {"SRC-PID": {"DEST-PID": 123}}

   JSON Patch represents that change as:




Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 18]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


        {"replace": "cost-map.SRC-PID.DEST-PID", "value": 123}

   Also, JSON Patch does not solve the "what version?" problem.  Thus we
   still need to assign version tags to cost maps, and we would still
   need new services similar to our Incremental Network and Cost Map
   Update Services.  The difference would be that the body of the
   responses would have JSON Patch data instead of the Network and Cost
   Map structures.

   Finally, we have serious doubts as to whether JSON Patch can handle
   maps of the size we expect.  To see the problem, realize that
   incremental update is only important for large maps.  For small maps,
   a client can just retrieve the full version.

   For a client to take advantage of an "apply patch" method in a JSON
   library, the client would almost certainly have to store the Cost Map
   using a Document Object Model (DOM) representation provided by that
   library.  However, a DOM representation of a Cost Map with (say)
   1,000 PIDs requires 1,000 associative tables, each of which has 1,000
   entries.  That takes a considerable amount of space.

   However, there are far more efficient ways to represent an ALTO Cost
   Map. For example, an implicit assumption is that costs change more
   frequently than network maps.  So a client can assign numbers to the
   PID names by sorting, and then store the costs in a 1,000x1,000
   (possibly sparse) matrix.  Furthermore, the client can use single
   precision floating point values; it is difficult to believe that the
   ALTO costs are accurate enough to require double precision.  The
   resulting matrix takes much less space than a DOM representation, and
   can be searched much faster.

   Therefore if we used JSON Patch, a client might be forced to use a
   very inefficient representation of a Cost Map.

   JSON Patch causes similar problems for the ALTO Server.  To take full
   advantage of JSON Patch, a server would have to present two DOM
   versions of the Cost Map to a "calculate patch" method.  Those
   representations would take a lot of space.  Furthermore, calculating
   the difference between two DOMs of that size will tax most computers.
   And finally, as we outlined above, we expect the ALTO Server will
   know the difference anyway.

   To summarize, we believe that for ALTO incremental update, JSON Patch
   is an overly general approach that would be far too expensive.







Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 19]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


7.  IANA Considerations

   The Incremental Update service as proposed introduces a new MIME type
   "application/alto-vtag+json" which needs to be registered.















































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 20]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


8.  Security Considerations

   This extension does not introduce any security issues that are not
   present in the base ALTO protocol.















































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 21]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


9.  Conclusion

   This document describes different options that can be applied to
   support incremental updates of ALTO Network and Cost maps.  In
   particular it comprises option for client and server to synchronize
   themselves about their current map state, and further includes
   options on how to encode partial updates.  Finally it proposes an new
   incremental update service and evaluates different options
   numerically.










































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 22]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


10.  References

   [I-D.ietf-alto-protocol]
              Alimi, R., Penno, R., and Y. Yang, "ALTO Protocol",
              draft-ietf-alto-protocol-10 (work in progress),
              October 2011.

   [I-D.jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases]
              Niven-Jenkins, B., Watson, G., Bitar, N., Medved, J., and
              S. Previdi, "Use Cases for ALTO within CDNs",
              draft-jenkins-alto-cdn-use-cases-01 (work in progress),
              June 2011.

   [RFC2046]  Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
              Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046,
              November 1996.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.

   [RFC2616]  Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
              Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Burners-Lee, "Hypertext
              Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.

   [RFC4632]  Fuller, V. and T. Li, ""Classless Inter-domain Routing
              (CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation
              Plan", RFC 4632, BCP 122, August 2006.

   [RFC5693]  Seedorf, J. and E. Burger, "Application-Layer Traffic
              Optimization (ALTO) Problem Statement", RFC 5693,
              October 2009.

   [RFC6902]  Bryan, P. and M. Nottingham, "JavaScript Object Notation
              (JSON) Patch", RFC 6902, April 2013.

















Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 23]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


Appendix A.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank Vijay Gurbani for his valuable input
   and excellent feedback to this document.

   Nico Schwan is partially supported by the ENVISION project
   (http://www.envision-project.org), a research project supported by
   the European Commission under its 7th Framework Program (contract no.
   248565).  The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the
   authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the
   official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of
   the ENVISION project or the European Commission.







































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 24]

Internet-Draft          ALTO Incremental Updates           February 2014


Authors' Addresses

   Wendy Roome
   Alcatel-Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs
   600 Mountain Ave, Rm 3B-324
   Murray Hill, NJ  07974
   USA

   Phone: +1-908-582-7974
   Email: w.roome@alcatel-lucent.com


   Nico Schwan
   Thales Deutschland
   Lorenzstrasse 10
   Stuttgart  70435
   Germany

   Email: nico.schwan@thalesgroup.com
































Roome & Schwan           Expires August 17, 2014               [Page 25]


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-24 05:53:29