ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: OPES protocol, pre-draft

2003-02-21 11:17:40
hi,

see inside please.

abbie


-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Rousskov [mailto:rousskov(_at_)measurement-factory(_dot_)com] 
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 12:42 PM
To: ietf-openproxy(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: OPES protocol, pre-draft


I agree that calling OPES protocol ICAP may help OPES 
acceptance/deployment for non-technical reasons. To save time 
and flames, I suggest to avoid the naming issue until OPES 
protocol is shaped and the consensus is, in fact, that it is 
better than ICAP/1.0.

Thank you,

Alex.

Let us be carefull here. So far my main concern with the proposed protocol
is that it looks a lot like ICAP.  The main scenarioes that are solved so
far are basically packaging (or passing )a request to the callout server,
with all the technicalities.

We need to start thinking about scenarios that involves the user
preferences, that include the choice of obtaining a service from more than
one source etc..

It is far too early to start even thinking about naming the OPES callout
protocol ICAP xxxx.

abbie








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