ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Charter issues

2003-04-12 04:59:19

On 00:21 11/04/03, The Purple Streak, Hilarie Orman said:
My impression was that we would have guidelines, but the only thing that
would really be standardized would be a callout protocol and tracing
support.  What's the group opinion?

As indicated several times I consider that the callout protocol is NO part of the OPES concept. It is a convenient way for Service providers to operate WITHIN the common processing of an OPES. If the callout protocol is above transportation layers it can be a framework for inter service applications. If there are transport layers proposing faster, more secure and more efficient solutions than TCP/IP this will be of interest to create "network black hole" provinding a faster, more secure and more efficient service than TCP/IP.

All the issues you point out are far more important as far as service operations and provisions are concerned. And, again, their organization depend very much on an OPES/ONES modelization first. As pointed out still recently the model we use (dispatcher/call-out protocol/call-out servers) can only be a part of the OPES chain, even when this architecture is used, because both ends can use it. This would create already a daisy chaining and the temptation of a direct call-out relation between these two, without getting down at http; smtp etc. protocol.

I feel this results from the "proxy" image whch made the proxy server to be considered as a front-end dispatcher, ie performing an OPES level of tasks (hence the OPES Procesor wording as a machine in front of the Content Server). A true architecture is dasy chaining along the transport or querry/response path. With all the points you rise. IMHO at least.
jfc









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