Re: known request routing

[Eric Dean <eric@crystalballinc.com>]

At 09:31 4/19/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Section 4.2.3: Raises security concerns and may have problems with 
>zipped/encrypted
>content.

But surely an agent operating directly on behalf of the content server 
(e.g. part of the server or something sitting in front of it) is going to 
be part of the same security/administrative domain, and therefore have less 
issues with security.  It should also be in a position to consider 
compression fairly well I would have thought.

For forward-proxies, they are not necessarily an agent operating on behalf of the 
content server.

>Section 6.2.1: You may also want to highlight that probing techniques 
>often only
>probe the client DNS server and not the client.

We we want to be that specific?  On determining the list of things to 
probe, 6.1.1 says "This list can be generated dynamically. Here, as 
requests arrive, the requesting entity addresses can be cached for later 
probing."  No protocol scope for the requesting entity, so it could be DNS 
or HTTP and therefore have different clients.

I merely said often in that it can be a drawback.
--
Eric Dean
President, Crystal Ball Inc.
W 703-322-8000
F 703-322-8010 
M 703-597-6921