----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Avalon-Phoenix Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 3:04 PM Subject: Re: PR9270
> > > Eung-ju Park wrote: > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Stephen McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Avalon-Phoenix Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 7:42 AM > >Subject: Re: PR9270 > > > > > > > > > >>Should this be at the meta-data level (as your proposing) or the > >>meta-info level? I think it would be more appropriate for the > >>inforation to go into the blockinfo (in Phoenix) or as a component > >>attribute in the Type DTD. > >> > >> > > > >I think it it meta-data. It specified by assembler, not block developer. > >It is not about block it self. I think it is about block assembling. > > > > The existace of a component that is itself a proxy is a developer > decision. For example, the org.omg.ORB class is a proxy to an > implementation. The Java VM handles the loading of the implemetation > class behind the scenes. But the developer needs to say to the > assembler - hey - watch out - this class is already a proxy. > Potentially, an assembler could be dealing with alternative > implentations of a particular service - one already a proxy, and another > an interface. Is there an issue for the assembler - or is this an issue > for the container? My feeling is that this is an issue between the > container and the componet - however, if it is an assembler issue, then > the question for the assemble is if a proxy class is allowed or not. > However, I doubt if this is a valid assembler question. The only thing > I can think of as an issue is if the class implements lifecyle > interfaces that could be potentially absused and as a result, raise a > security implication. Yes. disabling proxy causes security problem. It is tradeoff. Trade off performance and security. I think enable/disable proxy is just assembler issue. Because current proxy's feature is just export only permitted service interfaces. PS. Sorry for my poor English. I don't understand your opinion fully. And don't expressing my opinion correctly. > > Cheers, Steve. > > > > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > -- > > Stephen J. McConnell > > OSM SARL > digital products for a global economy > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.osm.net > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
