Re: deas

From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@dont-contact.us>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:06:52 +0800

On Sun, Jun 11, 2000, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> Summarizes the discussions quite well I think.
>
> Do I understand you correctly in that the communication between the
> layers are centered around a request specific "inter-layer-connection"
> rather than the StoreEntry? And that this "connection" should be defined
> in a generic and pluggable way to allow introducing of additional layers
> like filtering when/if required?

Yup. This way, a storeentry is only ever seen by the storage manager,
which is the way I think it should be.

The layering would allow for things such as content-based filtering and
other nify things if you wanted to.. the main thing I'm aiming for
is flexibility without too much complexity. You could kill all
hierarchial code, for example, if you wanted a squid which didn't need
to know about siblinges. You could also remove or add ACL types in
the processing list if you saw fit, so you could kill all ACLs
you didn't need.

Adrian
Received on Sun Jun 11 2000 - 19:07:03 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:12:29 MST