Subject: Re: [CDNi] Vancouver decisions on CDNI and HTTP Adaptive Bitrate Streaming (HAS)

From: "Francois Le Faucheur (flefauch)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 11:59:06 +0000

All,
The Vancouver WG decision to move ahead along the recommendations detailed in draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03.txt (wrt to HAS) is now considered final.

To cdni-framework editors and cdni-requirements editors,
Please ensure that the next version of these documents is brought in full alignment with this decision.

Cheers

Francois & Rich

On 10 Aug 2012, at 11:57, Francois Le Faucheur (flefauch) wrote:

> Folks,
> 
> As documented in the draft minutes of the Vancouver CDNI meeting, based on the corresponding "Hum test", we have established a tentative WG decision to move ahead along the recommendations detailed in draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03.txt. This decision will be considered final unless we hear substantiated arguments against it on the list by the end of the month.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Francois & Rich
> 
> 
> On 23 Jul 2012, at 13:14, Francois Le Faucheur wrote:
> 
>> Folks,
>> 
>> In line with the approach agreed in Paris, a lot of work has gone since into analysing the options for how the different CDNI interfaces could/should handle HTTP Adaptive Bitrate Streaming (HAS) and in documenting this analysis as well as recommendations to facilitate WG decisions. This includes the work of the extended design team that held three virtual meetings since Paris, as well as the work from Ray (and co-authors) in revving up draft-brandenburg-cdni-has multiple times accordingly.
>> 
>> Our objective for Vancouver is to reach tentative agreement on how the different CDNI interfaces are to handle HAS. To maximise our chances of success, we'd like to request that people who want to contribute into that discussion do read draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03 before Vancouver, and engage into as much clarification/discussion as possible on the list before Vancouver.
>> 
>> In Vancouver, Ray and co-authors will give a brief recap of the options, their pros-and-cons and of the recommendations, in order to try bring everyone up to speed. But it is a complex topic, with a lot of subtle ramifications, and we feel the only way to have a constructive discussion in a constrain timeslot is if everyone shares a similar base level of terminology/understanding. This is why we request that people be familar with the latest version of draft-brandenburg-cdni-has (ie -03).
>> 
>> Note that for each of the dimensions analysed in draft-brandenburg-cdni-has, there is a subsection highlighing the recommendations for that dimension (specifically sections 3.1.3, 3.2.3, 3.3.3 , 3.4.3 and 3.5.9).
>> 
>> In the context of that discussion, I would also like everyone to keep in mind the following statement from our charter:
>> "
>> The CDNI WG aims at delivering a targeted, deployable solution in a short timeframe (18-24 months) as needed by the industry.
>> "
>> and the related guiding principle followed by the extended design team:
>> "
>> we have a strong motivation to develop first what is REQUIRED to make HAS work. We need to focus on fundamentals to make HAS work vs how to use CDN-I to make things work better.
>> "
>> 
>> Remember also that, once it has delivered a first set of CDNI interfaces, it is possible for the CDNI WG to propose to recharter in order to develop extensions for more advanced functionality. So the HAS decisions that the WG will make now only conditions what is to be included in the deliverables against the initial charter, it does not limit what might be supported by CDNI interfaces in the future.
>> 
>> Looking forward to discussing CDNI support for HAS in Vancouver or on the list before.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Francois & Rich
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: <[email-masked]>
>>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03.txt
>>> Date: 13 July 2012 14:49:33 CEST
>>> To: <[email-masked]>
>>> Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 	Title           : Models for adaptive-streaming-aware CDN Interconnection
>>> 	Author(s)       : Ray van Brandenburg
>>>                        Oskar van Deventer
>>>                        Francois Le Faucheur
>>>                        Kent Leung
>>> 	Filename        : draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03.txt
>>> 	Pages           : 43
>>> 	Date            : 2012-07-13
>>> 
>>> Abstract:
>>> This documents presents thoughts on the potential impact of
>>> supporting HTTP Adaptive Streaming technologies in CDN
>>> Interconnection scenarios.  Our intent is to spur discussion on how
>>> the different CDNI interfaces could, and should, deal with content
>>> delivered using adaptive streaming technologies and to facilitate
>>> working group decisions.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brandenburg-cdni-has
>>> 
>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03
>>> 
>>> A diff from previous version is available at:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-brandenburg-cdni-has-03
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>>> [email-masked]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CDNi mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni