[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Models & Scenarios
- To: cdn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Models & Scenarios
- From: "Phil Rzewski" <philr@inktomi.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 14:34:33 -0800
- Delivery-date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 14:36:17 -0800
- Envelope-to: cdn-data@psg.com
Hi team. I just wanted to send along this companion message a background
the changes I've made to the Models & Scenarios documents.
The overall goal is to "float a balloon" of some high-level ideas we've
seemed to have rough consensus on since the last BOF meeting. The first of
these was trying to generalize from "CDNs" and "CDN Peering" to "Content
Networks" and "Content Internetworking". Other than just a change in
wording, this also implies some change in scope.
For example, in the Models document, I added some sections showing
historical types of "Content Networks", such as hierarchical caching and
server farms. In the Scenarios document, this meant naming some specific
traits/refinements of certain peer-worthy Content Networks, some of which
I've given names to like "Access Content Networks", "Publishing Content
Networks", and "Brokering Content Networks". While I got some preliminary
support from some folks on this approach, I'm curious to see how it's
received by the wider audience. I have historically seen two approaches: 1)
Think of everything as a CDN, think of refined cases as degenerate cases of
CDNs, and 2) Cite existing examples that don't look much like what's called
a CDN today and call them out by name. So this is a stab at the latter.
By the way, when you read Scenarios, you'll notice that despite the reading
off of ACN/PCN/BCN, they aren't woven into the actual scenarios in section
3 yet. I figured I'd leave that stuff undone until I at least get consensus
behind the approach in section 2.
You'll also notice that, while "internetworking" is used in place of
"peering" in a lot of places, it's not a 100% migration. When I got up to
section 6 in Models, I could see that the word "peering" is deeply woven
into our vocabulary, and saying "Accounting Internetworking Gateway" is
just a mouthful of marbles, so I drew the line there. :)
So anyway, feel free to comment now or in Minneapolis. Thanks.
--
Phil Rzewski - Senior Architect - Inktomi Corporation
650-653-2487 (office) - 650-303-3790 (cell) - 650-653-1848 (fax)