I think it is difficult for any working group to assume the responsibility
for assuring that everyone will do everything correctly in terms
of services, regardless of their location in the client-server chain. Yes,
things
can be mis-used. You might consider Ad insertion a mis-use others
who get reduced cost ISP because of them might feel differently.
By looking at the framework and associated protocols we might come
with a operational model so that the content providers, service agents
and consumers know what they are getting into. I think we better
get that trust model well organized.
At 01:40 PM 6/18/2001 -0700, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> From the publisher/consumer standpoint, OPES is not about encapsulation
> or routing and very seldom about encoding.
>
>These are the most common potentially damaging uses of ICAP, either
>currently in use or discussed:
>
> Insert ads.
> Insert a 'console' to 'brand' the browsing session.
> Rewrite links.
> Translate a document (changing its meaning)
> Redirect to a local copy of the resource (making it impossible to
> access the authoritative resource)
>
>Does Ethernet do these things?
>
>Of course publishers can protect against these things; they can run all of
>their content over SSL/TLS, watermark everything, etc. What if OPES is
>sucessful? Is the trust model of the Internet ready for this? The
>infrastructure (imagine if all HTTP traffic moved to SSL, making caching
>useless)?
>
>Putting the burden of mitigating the effects of OPES onto content
>publishers and end users isn't a nice thing to do.
>
>
>
>Scott Brim wrote:
>
>>Publishers lose control of how a resource is treated but still
>>(optionally) retain control over the resource itself, e.g. through
>>watermarks. I doubt that publishers care if their content is carried
>>over Ethernet or ATM today. How much do publishers care how their
>>content is encapsulated, routed, encoded, etc.? What do you think OPES
>>could do that a publisher (1) would be concerned about, and (2) could
>>not protect against?
>>...Scott
>>On 18 Jun 2001 at 12:51 -0700, Mark Nottingham apparently wrote:
>>
>>>As such, the OPES goals break end-to-end transparency at the
>>>application layer. As a result, (using HTTP as an example, because it
>>>seems the first target of OPES), the publisher loses control over a
>>>resource once it leaves their server. It then becomes impossible to
>>>makes statements about that resource (e.g., P3P, Semantic Web, legal
>>>status of a resource, etc.).
>
>
>--
>Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
>Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)
Michael W. Condry
Director, Network Edge Technology
