email, smtp ( was Re: bypass requirement?)
ArkanoiD <[email protected]> Wed, 13 Dec 2006 13:38:44 +0300
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.opes |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
nuqneH, I think "must" word is evil sometimes. IMAP comes in mind, the protocol that seems to be designed to make content inspection a real nightmare - just because every way to slice a email to tiny bits is mandatory to be implemented on the server. Back to OPES, shouldn't there be "generic OPES for email", not really smtp-specific but able to deal with SMTP, POP3 and (bwarf!) IMAP? On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:11:39AM +0100, Stecher,Martin wrote: > > > OPES specificationas are not created for single environments. > While a bypass feature may not be useful in one scenario it will be very > valid in others. > > Following earlier discussions and IAB requirements, OPES specs MUST provide > a bypass feature while the local policy when deploying and implementing OPES > in certain environments will determine whether a bypass request can be > fulfilled or not. > > Martin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ArkanoiD > > Sent: Dienstag, 12. Dezember 2006 16:10 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: bypass requirement? > > > > > > nuqneH, > > > > Doesn't mandatory OPES bypass feature requirement (it is > > noted as "must") look illogical in firewall environment? > > > > First, it makes code more complicated and second, it should > > be never used ;-) > > > >