ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: draft-ietf-opes-architecture-01: Feedback

2002-06-13 21:07:38


1. [Page 4]

OPES rules: these determine how a given data flow is modified by
     an OPES entity.

This statement may leave impression that rules describe data
transformation.

I think the purpose of rules is better described as:

"specify when and how to execute OPES intermediary services"

<this is taken from draft-beck-opes-irml-01>
---------------

2. General composition of chapter 2.

In the beginning this chapter has 3 bullets, then it has subchapters 2.1,
2.2 and 2.3 that correspond to these bullets. But then it has additional
subchapters:

2.4 Callout Servers
2.5 Policy Enforcement
2.6 Tracing Facility

To preserve composition integrity I'd suggest to add 4th bullet for
Callout Servers and move 2.6 (Tracing facility) to chapter 3 as 3.6. This
way we have chapter 2 describing all OPES objects and chapter 3 covering all
security related questions.
--------------

On 2.5 (Policy Enforcement)

dispatcher constitutes an enhanced Policy Enforcement Point (PEP),

Use of PEP abbreviation may be a little confusing: this document
references RFC 3238, which uses this abbreviation in a different
sense - Performance-Enhancing Proxies, originating in RFC 3135
(see RFC 3238, p.4).

As I understand PEP abbreviation here is used in the sense of COPS,
but the notion of "policy" in COPS is somewhat different. To add
more confusion in the name of RFC3135 "IAB Architectural and Policy
Considerations for Open Pluggable Edge Services" the word "policy"
has yet another meaning.

I'd suggest to abandon this terminology (Policy Enforcement
Point - PEP) in this document. It is not well defined here and looks very
ambiguous.

Let's just call data dispatchers data dispatchers. They are introduced
in 2.1, so  all 2.5 can be moved there, either as "2.1.1 Data Dispatcher" or
without subheader.

Oskar



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