ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: New updated ICAP draft

2001-02-14 12:46:38
In addition to my earlier comment (that we should explicitly state 
that encapsulated chunked rather than saying they should not be
broken into multiple chunks if thats what we mean), I have a couple
more questions.

1. Does the chunk inidcator ieof only apply to preview?  That is how
    the examples read.  So a non-previewed message will be terminated
    by a 0\r\n rather than by 0; ieof.  I think this is right, but the text
    can be clearer,

2. HTTP allows for trailing headers when chunking.  Do we want to as
    well?  If so, do we want a mechanism like the TE and TRAILER header 
    fields?

Craig

Alberto Cerpa <cerpa(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU> 02/07/01 08:44PM >>>
Hi all,

It seems that the imc mailer is not accepting attachments, because the
email didn't go through yesterday.

Please take a look at the draft located at:
http://lecs.cs.ucla.edu/~cerpa/icap/draft-elson-opes-icap-00.txt

Regards,
-Alberto.

On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Alberto Cerpa wrote:

Hi all,

I am attaching the new updated draft based on some comments we received
from Nov 17 till present.

They basically consist of the following:

- Added the default port number 1344 assigned by IANA instead of 
  PORT-TBD (several parts of the document).

- Changed the grammar to allow ONLY one body in the ICAP message; a 
  Request body in REQMOD and the Response body in RESPMOD. I also added 
  an explicit statement saying this in the text (section 5.4).

- Forced the final CLRF at the end of the message with a MUST instead of 
  a SHOULD (section 5.4).

- Added a note that chunking MUST NOT break headers sets into multiple 
  chunks (sections 5.7 & 5.8).

- Changed all the examples accordingly, based on the previous 
  modifications (sections 5.7 & 5.8).

- Changed the header "Allow:" to "Feature:" in the OPTIONS mode.  This 
  is to avoid overloading "Allow:" with different semantics based on the 
  ICAP message's mode (Allow meaning on thing in REQMOD/RESPMOD and a 
  different thing in OPTIONS).  Nevertheless, please note that the 
  examples in OPTIONS are just examples (Section 5.9).

As usual, comments are welcome.

Regards,
Alberto & Jeremy.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>