Re: Forward architecture.

From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@dont-contact.us>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:42:52 -0700

On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 14:57 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:

> The idea that comes to me immediately is to make the forward handle a
> dispatcher/manager where the currently compiled additional-modules
> register themselves against various parameters (method, url-protocol,
> etc) and the forwarder hands of the connection data to them after
> checking these details. Defaulting to HTTP when unknown.
>
> This would enable easily plugged in extras to squid-3.

Yes, like everything else in Squid, this has been already proposed in
1971.

Seriously, the idea seems reasonable to me and we already have some code
to load additional modules (part of the eCAP work). If you go down that
path, the client-side may need the same architecture as well because
some protocols will probably require non-HTTP actions on the client
side. At that point, it is not clear whether the right place to hand off
the control to a different protocol class/module is in the forwarder. It
may have to be done earlier!

Cheers,

Alex.
Received on Tue Feb 05 2008 - 08:43:05 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Sat Mar 01 2008 - 12:00:09 MST