RE: New draft available

[Gary Tomlinson <garyt@entera.com>]

I don't see how ICP can be considered to be within the context of
request-routing as defined within CDNP.  ICP is used between caches to
locate content being delivered by the requestor of ICP, where "delivery" is
the key aspect to be considered.  In CDNP request-routing involves getting a
request to a surrogate for delivery, as opposed to the surrogate utilizing
ICP to find content within the CDN.  Simply put, ICP happens within the
cloud itself as a byproduct of a CLIENT REQUEST being serviced by SURROGATE.
I see ICP as being associated with DISTRIBUTION within the CDNP context.

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-cdn@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-cdn@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Eric Dean
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 9:06 AM
To: Mark Day
Cc: cdn@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: New draft available



This memo doesn't address any implementations of using ICP RFC2186/RFC2187
for CDN Request Mappings.  I have seen cases whereby an ISP either uses
transparent caches, or forced browser proxy into a cache that then speaks
ICP to nearby surrogates.

I have also seen implementations of CDN Request Mappings that use BGP
multi-homing techniques whereby the DNS address for content is registered
to an IP address that is shared by many surrogates in a diverse network.
The network then routes the content requests to the nearest surrogate.
   
Both of these implementations are widely used and have considerable
issues.

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Mark Day wrote:

> This one really is new, as opposed to a revision of an existing draft:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-cain-cdnp-known-req-map-00.txt
> or
> http://www.content-peering.org/draft-cain-cdnp-known-req-map-00.html
> 
> Here's the abstract:
> 
>     This memo presents a number of known mechanisms used to direct
>     client application requests to surrogate servers based on various
>     policies. In this memo we group mechanisms commonly called request
>     routing, content routing or content redirection under the term
>     request mapping. There exist multiple request mapping mechanisms. At
>     a high-level, these may be classified under: DNS Request Mapping,
>     Transport-layer Mapping, and Application-layer Mapping.
> 
> Thanks to the multiple members of the design team who wrote this new
draft:
> Brad Cain, Fred Douglis, Mark Green, Markus Hoffmann, Raj Nair, Doug
Potter,
> and Oliver Spatscheck.
> 
> --Mark
> 
> 

Eric Dean
President, Crystal Ball Inc.
W 703-322-8000
F 703-322-8010 
M 703-597-6921