[Top] [All Lists]

Re: comments on draft-dracinschi-opes-callout-requirements-00

2002-03-01 12:28:55

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 11:17:46AM -0800, Ian Cooper wrote:
Perhaps "MAY be requested" makes more sense?

Or should it read something like "an intermediary SHOULD keep a local copy 
of the message...if requested" ??

Looks like we're playing with "english" here and there might be a 
difference between EN-us and EN-gb (and EN-au for that matter ;-) )

Thanks for your sensitivity to my (adopted) people, but I don't think
that's the issue.

As I understand it, the choice is whether to require the OPES
intermediary to be able to buffer messages, at the convenience of the
OPES service. 

Markus replied that it was not required; buffering may be used as an
optimisation, but can't be relied upon. My original conception was
that it was required, for simplicity, but that idea was based on old
ICAP work, IIRC.


--On Friday, March 1, 2002 10:12 -0800 Mark Nottingham 

If it is only MAY, the intermediary makes the choice as to whether
it keeps a buffer. If it's 'MAY be required', the service makes
the choice.

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 12:20:40PM -0500, 
Hi, I am a little confused as to what is the difference between
these two phrases:

* Section 3.2.3 - I *think* this should read "An intermediary MAY keep
a local copy..." -> "An intermediary MAY be required to keep a
local copy..."

Dont "MAY keep" and "MAY be required to keep" imply the same
thing given the implication of MAY (RFC 2119)?

Please clarify.


Mark Nottingham

Mark Nottingham