Martin,
I think we only need one header (at the service level). This header should
be applicable to requets and/or responces. This header must not be deleted.
abbie
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Stecher [mailto:martin(_dot_)stecher(_at_)webwasher(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 1:15 PM
To: OPES WG (E-Mail)
Subject: Bypassing
Hi,
some questions about how to fill the Bypass section in the
http adaption document.
0. Information missing in other drafts?
draft-ietf-opes-end-comm-02 does not include any information
about bypassing. draft-ietf-opes-iab-02 only points out that
the tracin information can be later used to request OPES
bypass. Do we need more elaboration on bypassing in
draft-ietf-opes-end-comm?
1. What to bypass?
There are trace headers OPES-System, OPES-Processor and
OPES-Service. Which ones make sense to use in bypassing?
Usually it will not be possible to bypass an OPES-Processor
but is it required to ask for bypassing of all OPES services
that an OPES processor uses? So, do we need one, two or three
OPES-Bypass headers?
2. Wildcards
I guess we want to allow something like
OPES-Bypass: *
to request bypassing of all OPES services.
Did we ever think about different classes of services?
It could make sense to allow all non-modifying OPES services,
i.e. those that do some logging/reporting wihtout touching
the data at all or those that block the complete message on
policy violation (e.g. virus found) but would not alter the
page itself. I guess due to the notification/tracing dilema
in almost all cases, the HTTP server will not know about
single OPES services to bypass and if it is concerned about
OPES services it has to request bypass of all or at least of
some sort of OPES services.
Regards
Martin