On Fri, 18 Jun 1999 20:28:37 -0700, John Dilley wrote:
>> Neither of these "transparent" definitions has anything to do with
>> traffic interception/redirection.
>
> Unfortunately the HTTP/1.1 definition of transparent is not what
>the term has come to describe.
Hmm, do you mean "transparent" or do you mean "transparent proxy".
("transparent" probably best relates to semantic transparency I would
think.)
> Should the community attempt to choose a
>new term (and influence the industry to use it)? Can the HTTP/1.1 term
>be renamed? Should WREC document the different use of the term in
>today's caching industry? (My preference is the last one, since I do
>not believe we can modify common usage, nor can we change the existing
>spec overnight.) Other input? Thank you,
I'd tend to agree with your preference here, although we have to be
careful. We typically call things "caches" when we actually mean
"caching servers" or "caching proxies" - but the contracted name isn't
too bad.
When we talk about a "transparent proxy", we are probably talking
about all of the components that make the proxy transparent to the
content consumer. The(only?) confusing aspect there is that the word
proxy now includes an implicit reference to intercepting and/or
redirecting traffic.
Ian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:26 MST