[Top] [All Lists]

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

2002-03-07 00:05:49

The intermediary can certainly keep track of A, tr1(A), and tr2(A),
where A is an object (stream), tr1(A) is A transformed by service type 1, and tr2(A) is A transformed by service type 2. The intermediary
might delivery A immediately to satisfy some requests (even forwarding
the stream packet-by-packet as it arrives), serve and cache tr1(A) for
some requests, and cache tr2(A) for a different period of time and
server different requests with that data.  That's the simple case.
It seems relatively straightforward, if we are talking about the
same thing.


Markus Hofmann wrote:


I agree that parallel service requests (actually to totally different call-out server) are very powerful, but the callout server would never known by its own whether its modifications on the message are going to affect other services or not. [...]

I agree, and it seems there might be several different approaches to solve this problem, but each of them would add some complexity to the system.

So, a general first question is whether we would like to allow parallel service requests on the same message or not. What are the expected benefits and do they justify added complexity? Any opinions?