Subject: [CDNi] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18: (with COMMENT)

From: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 11:30:53 -0700

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cdni-metadata/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Two comments:

1) It's still not really clear to me why the use of HTTPS is not
mandatory... maybe that's related to my second comment below...?

2) I'm a little confused with the use of the term 'caching'. Maybe I'm
assuming a wrong scenario, but to my understanding a dCDN would request
metadata from an uCDN and simply store them. Or would the dCDN
re-distribute the metadata it got from the uCDN to other dCDNs?

---

From: Kevin Ma J <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 18:45:11 +0000

Hi Mirja,

  Thanks for the review.

> mandatory... maybe that's related to my second comment below...?

  Are you referring to the use of HTTPS in retrieving metadata, or the use of HTTPS in delivery of the content?  For the former, we may need to update the security considerations text to match logging, triggers, and redirection; for the latter, we did not want to tackle the issue of how to distribute keys to dCDNs (though, LURK may help to address that issue).

> re-distribute the metadata it got from the uCDN to other dCDNs?

  I assume you mean caching of the metadata itself (and not caching of the associated content)?  The dCDN will store the metadata for its own use, as well as possibly re-distribute the metadata to further dCDNs.  The cache controls on metadata allows metadata to timeout without an explicit purge via the trigger interface.

thanx!

--  Kevin J. Ma

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mirja Kuehlewind [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 2:31 PM
> To: The IESG
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-metadata-18:
> (with COMMENT)
>