ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Comments on ocp-00

2003-04-03 13:28:38

On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Reinaldo Penno wrote:

I liked your summary. I guess we should wait for other opinions.

Agreed.

Okay, how I write the capability negotiation part?

You will see some placeholders in the 00 draft to support negotiation
(message "do-you-support" and below). You can wipe those clean or fill
the blanks, whatever works best for you. If at all possible, please
use XML sources rather than text or HTML rendering. You will find
more-or-less current sources and instructions at

        http://www.measurement-factory.com/tmp/opes/

Let me know if you have any questions, concerns, or suggestions about
the sources or editing process.

Thank you,

Alex.


-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Rousskov [mailto:rousskov(_at_)measurement-factory(_dot_)com]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 12:44 PM
To: OPES Group
Subject: RE: Comments on ocp-00



Here is a short summary of the pending issues on this thread.

    a) OPES processor may be able to pre-process application
      messages (e.g., extract payload). Callout servers
      may be able to handle various kinds of application
      data (e.g., complete HTTP messages versus MIME-encoded
      payload). Thus, somebody needs to tell OPES processor
      and callout server what is an "application message"
      definition that they should both use during OCP
      communications. Should OCP support auto-negotiation or
      rely on out-of-band (e.g., manual) configuration?

    b) Do we really need a special "error" flag to say
      "rally bad error; you should probably wipe out all
       related state". Or can we assign the same side-effect
       to some of the result codes?

    c) OPES processor can be [a part of] an application-level
      proxy. Can OPES processor be a transport-level gateway
      too? For example, can OPES processor manipulate with
      raw TCP packets and care about things like
      retransmissions and ACKs?

    d) If a fragment of an application message is lost,
       [how] should OPES processor signal that to the callout
       server? A loss can happen when adapting lossy application
       protocols.

    e) Do we need to group processing of a single application
       message together using OCP transaction concept? Should
       OCP transaction mean something else? Do we need OCP
       transactions at all?

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