[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy

To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy
From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 09:09:03 -0800
Cc: netconf@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <3FD0B413.1030609@cisco.com>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20031202160207.029dc460@fedex.cisco.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20031202160207.029dc460@fedex.cisco.com>

At 08:36 AM 12/5/2003, Eliot Lear wrote:
>Andy, this issue is broader.  As Phil pointed out, if people use SOAP/HTTP transparent proxies could cause all sorts of trouble, particularly because NETCONF has a session-based view and HTTP does not.
>
>Or is this a different ISSUE?

I was referring to the text in the NETCONF Over SOAP draft
about proxy mechanisms.  I guess we should have a separate
issue ID for HTTP proxy issues.


>Eliot

Andy




>Andy Bierman wrote:
>>NETCONF has no proxy; text related to proxy should be removed
>>
>>--
>>to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
>>the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
>>archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>


--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy
  - From: Ted Goddard <ted.goddard@windriver.com>

References:
- Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy
  - From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>
- Re: Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy
  - From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Issue 9.1) DoS attack using global <lock>
Next by Date: Re: Issue 9.1) DoS attack using global <lock>
Previous by thread: Re: Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy
Next by thread: Re: Issue 6.1) SOAP Proxy
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread