Re: status of internal redirectors?

On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 23:19 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On tor, 2008-05-08 at 08:35 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>
> > I am not sure this is the same topic, but I have already raised doubts
> > (on the wiki and in the bug report) that we should extend the
> > Squid-specific helper interface significantly beyond its current
> > relatively simple state. I still believe it is worth discussing whether
> > more complex uses should be routed through ICAP or eCAP instead of
> > slowly inventing yet another complicated and poorly maintained traffic
> > adaptation interface.
>
> I think Mark is talking about the store url rewriter. It's a cache
> maintenance function, not really modifying the request/response in any
> manner, and I don't see how to fit that in ICAP or even the goals of
> eCAP.
>
> But it's possible eCAP may grow in future to include such things..

Agreed on all counts: store rewriting does not fit ICAP or current eCAP
scope well, but eCAP scope may change. My comment still applies, I
think. ICAP and especially eCAP do not really care what the vectoring
point is. They just "rewrite" messages that we feed them with. The
purpose of that rewrite (in a broad sense) can be a cached URL
maintenance function, for example.

Alex.
Received on Thu May 08 2008 - 22:02:55 MDT