email, smtp ( was Re: bypass requirement?)

[ArkanoiD <ark@xxxxxxxxx>]

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: owner-ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > [mailto:owner-ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ArkanoiD
> > Sent: Dienstag, 12. Dezember 2006 16:10
> > To: ietf-openproxy@xxxxxxx
> > 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 ;-)
> > 
> >