I think it is difficult for any working group to assume the responsibility
for assuring that everyone will do everything correctly in terms
of services, regardless of their location in the client-server chain. Yes,
things
can be mis-used. You might consider Ad insertion a mis-use others
who get reduced cost ISP because of them might feel differently.
By looking at the framework and associated protocols we might come
with a operational model so that the content providers, service agents
and consumers know what they are getting into. I think we better
get that trust model well organized.
At 01:40 PM 6/18/2001 -0700, Mark Nottingham wrote:
From the publisher/consumer standpoint, OPES is not about encapsulation
or routing and very seldom about encoding.
These are the most common potentially damaging uses of ICAP, either
currently in use or discussed:
Insert ads.
Insert a 'console' to 'brand' the browsing session.
Rewrite links.
Translate a document (changing its meaning)
Redirect to a local copy of the resource (making it impossible to
access the authoritative resource)
Does Ethernet do these things?
Of course publishers can protect against these things; they can run all of
their content over SSL/TLS, watermark everything, etc. What if OPES is
sucessful? Is the trust model of the Internet ready for this? The
infrastructure (imagine if all HTTP traffic moved to SSL, making caching
useless)?
Putting the burden of mitigating the effects of OPES onto content
publishers and end users isn't a nice thing to do.
Scott Brim wrote:
Publishers lose control of how a resource is treated but still
(optionally) retain control over the resource itself, e.g. through
watermarks. I doubt that publishers care if their content is carried
over Ethernet or ATM today. How much do publishers care how their
content is encapsulated, routed, encoded, etc.? What do you think OPES
could do that a publisher (1) would be concerned about, and (2) could
not protect against?
...Scott
On 18 Jun 2001 at 12:51 -0700, Mark Nottingham apparently wrote:
As such, the OPES goals break end-to-end transparency at the
application layer. As a result, (using HTTP as an example, because it
seems the first target of OPES), the publisher loses control over a
resource once it leaves their server. It then becomes impossible to
makes statements about that resource (e.g., P3P, Semantic Web, legal
status of a resource, etc.).
--
Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)
Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology