At 01:21 8/10/2001 -0700, Michael W. Condry wrote:
At 01:09 AM 8/10/2001, Ian Cooper wrote:
At 02:31 8/7/2001 -0700, Michael W. Condry wrote:
Web-based service engines are sometimes identified as "edge" servers,
which form an application-level overlay network on top of an IP network.
They are explicitly addressed at IP level and terminate a transport
connection in a normal way. Thus, they do not interfere with the
end-to-end principle in RFC 1958.
This is a weak attempt at addressing the concerns over "end-to-end",
though I agree it's very good to be explicit in identifying that the OPES
systems are explicitly addressed.
Its not a weak point at all. Following the concerns over "end-to-end" and the
explicit space of OPES we should discard web proxyies, the web, ... And
WEBI.
Correct, the RUP component of the WEBI work items addresses something that
has end-to-end issues.
The other WEBI work item does not.
As mentioned previously, there are application level/content end-to-end
concerns over deploying such an architecture - inherent in an overlay
network environment. Please be aware of *that* end-to-end issue when
stating reference to RFC1958.
"concerns" are useless comment. How about explicit items so matters could
be made more specific in the charter and documents. Vague comments
are not worthwhile.
I was hoping to avoid raising the points ad nauseam on the list. I've
mentioned the issues here before, and Ted addressed them in another way
with respect to the overlay network aspects on Tuesday.
If I'm a roaming user, what happens to my end-to-end connection? (It can
be *very* different, especially with some of the use cases identified.)
If my OPES intermediary goes away what happens?