W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Issues to think about in the MOM

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:34:36 -0500
To: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <20031120133436.C27273@www.markbaker.ca>

On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 10:09:34AM -0800, Ugo Corda wrote:
> > All addresses impact the meaning of a message.
> 
> I am not convinced this is true in the general case. In some cases the interposition of an intermediary is completely orthogonal to the meaning of the message as it was intended by the service provider and the service user (so much so that they might both be completely unaware of its existence - see for example the case of intermediaries inserted after initial deployment for purposes like global monitoring of a system).

You mean that the address of this intermediary isn't relevant?  Yes, I
agree, but that address isn't part of the message.

Sorry, I guess that's what you meant by the transparent proxy case in
your previous message.  I didn't understand what you meant by it when
I responded.

FWIW, there's also more complexity here with this with respect to
addresses not in the message affecting the meaning, viz a viz HTTP 1.0
permitting URI short hand and the need for the Host header in HTTP 1.1
to fix that (i.e.  make it self-descriptive so that virtual hosting
could be supported).  But I was just talking about the self-descriptive
case.

Mark.
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2003 13:32:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:23 GMT