# (2.2) IP-layer communications: For an OPES framework standardized in
# the IETF, the OPES intermediary must be explicitly addressed at the
# IP layer by the end user.
The above clause in draft-iab-opes-01.txt, taken literally as I
understand it,
constrains that only single-intermediary content processing pipeline
will be
possible under OPES. E.g. it'll be impossible to do filtering like:
server | language_translation | virus_scan | client
(or: server | insert_image | dither_image_for_viewing_device | client)
where the multiple intermediaries run on different IP hosts.
It's hard to image one would have to resort to some unscaleable hacks
like:
server | language_translation | \
server | virus_scan | client
in order to work around the constraint.
Q1, to IAB:
Would the IAB shed some light on the benefits of
stipulating n=1 (as in an n-intermediary OPES content
pipeline), such that they outweigh the cost of depriving
content providers and consumers the advantages that n>=1
offers, as exemplified in the use cases above?
Q2, to IAB & all:
Can the "explicit addressing at the IP layer by the end user,"
which I take it for the need of the end user's cognizance of
the remote IP address in the end_user-intermediary socket
connection, be critically meaningful for OPES practitioners
anyway in the face of NAT (which, incidentally, was yet
another IETF whipping boy)?
Thanks,
Joe Hui
Digital Island, a Cable & Wireless company
================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Condry, Michael W. [mailto:condry(_at_)intel(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 12:50 PM
To: ietf-openproxy(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Cc: Patrik Fältström; ned.freed-mrochek.com; Ellison Carl M
Subject: IAB document
OPES followers.
Understanding the issues in the IAB document is THE critical
goal of the
upcoming OPES meeting in Salt Lake City.
We all wish to go forward and "become official" and I believe we need
to understand the issues and work though them in our charter
and plans.
There are many requirements that apply outside of OPES that
were stimulated
because of the discussions around OPES. Topics impacting OPES
and other
areas will be discussed during the Thursday night plenary. In
out meeting
we are focusing on OPES, these concerns, and how we will
address time.
Certainly, we will not solve all the problems (particularly
security ones)
in the meeting but we will identify the suitable requirements
and work
items for us to meet.
See you all there.
Michael
Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology