Re: A DNS Based Mapping Peering System for Peering CDNs

["Abbie Barbir" <abbieb@nortelnetworks.com>]

Thanks for the reply, please find my notes below.

Hilarie Orman wrote:

> First, there's more than one metric that could be used, so the tables
> must give distance in terms of named metrics.

can we elaborate on those metrics. Can we elaborate on the distances and what do
they represent?

> Second, in order to do this, CDN's must exchange tables that
> identify their surrogates and measured distances.  I thought
> there was some sensitivity about this level of disclosure.  Thus,
> the architecture would only require that some form of query/response
> protocol be used; this might be a DNS query.

ok agreed on the sensitivity. However, let us assume that all tables are shared,
the distances that are measured
still do not reflect the distance from the surrogate to the client. If it does
can you explain how??

> Third, shortest-path-first is a reasonable way to minimize a graph
> metric parameter for those parties who are willing to exchange
> tables.

ok this can be done, but again are we minimizing the graph to get to a node that
is not the client. If not can you elaborate?


Regards
Abbie


>
>
> Hilarie
>
> >>> "Abbie Barbir" <abbieb@nortelnetworks.com> 11/29/00 02:50PM >>>
> Martin May wrote:
>
> > We work on this issue. Indeed, we are about to propose the exchange of
> > "mapping tables" (PMT)  during the peering process. A tree based DNS-MS
> > system simplifies the peering exchange especially if footprints are
> > used.
> >
>
> good to hear that.
>
> on a different note, any ideas on methods that could choose a particular
> surrogate that is closest to the client. It could be beneficial if this aspect
> of mapping start getting more attention. Any feedback people????
>
> ----
> abbie
begin:vcard 
n:Barbir, Ph.D.;Abbie
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:Nortel Networks;613 763 5229
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:abbieb@nortelnetworks.com
title:Senior Designer
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
fn:Abbie Barbir, Ph.D.
end:vcard