> From owner-wrec@cs.utk.edu Mon Nov 22 10:32:40 1999
> Delivery-Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 10:32:41 -0800
> Return-Path: owner-wrec@cs.utk.edu
> From: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@appliedtheory.com>
> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-wrec-taxonomy-03a.txt
> To: ian@mirror-image.com (Ian Cooper)
> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:32:00 -0500 (EST)
> Cc: wrec@cs.utk.edu
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:wrec-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>
>
> wrec: 3 (hopefully) minor nits to taxonomy.. my comments are
> prepended by >>>.
>
> -P
>
>
> [..]
> draft-ietf-wrec-taxonomy-03.txt
> [..]
>
> 2.2 First order derivative terms
>
> The following terms are constructed taking the above base terms as
> foundation.
>
> origin server (as given in [1])
> The server on which a given resource resides or is to be created.
>
> >>> The singular usage "The server" is confusing as 2.3 allows for a
> master and N replica origin servers.. how about "a server on which
> an authoritative copy of a given resource resides or will be created"
>
> ---------
>
> [..]
>
> 2.5 Automatic use of proxies
>
> Network administrators may wish to force or facilitate the use of
> proxies (typically caching proxies) by clients, enabling such
>
> >>> I'm uncomfortable with the parenthetical that describes
> motivations for including proxies.. the reasons for doing so are
> growing quickly.. including caching, you've got tracking,
> ad-filtering, QoS games, performance enhanching proxies,
> authentication, etc... Enumerating such things seems like a
> rathole: I think the paragraph works well without the
> parenthetical at all.
>
> --------
>
> [..]
>
> (network) transparent proxy
> [..]
> The use of this type of proxy
> is transparent to both user and client.
>
> >>> Using 'transparent' in the definition of 'transparent proxy' seems
> to be asking for trouble.. even I am not sure if this statement is
> meant to mean
> a] not detectable
> b] not relevant/not a factor operationally
> c] transparent in the non-transforming HTTP sense
> or d] does not require cooperation from client
Transparent means "not detectable at some layer" - in this case,
it is the application that cannot detect it.
> A and B are clearly not true.. C is probably true, but I don't
> think it's the motivation for the statement.. so I think it must
> mean D.. so how about: "The use of this type of proxy requires no
> configuration either by the user or the client."
"No configuration", "user", and "client" do not necessarily apply.
No _application_ configuration might. But that's not the only intent
of transparent. Not only is it not configurable, it isn't even detectable
at the layers above it.
Joe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:27 MST