James Carlson wrote:
> That's much simpler. I still maintain that we ought not be involved
> here, except (if we so choose) to make deployment of WPAD itself
> simpler.
This is certainly one option, do nothing except for the
GNOME apps :-)
> In other words, provide tools that help the administrator to set up
> the Apache or <insert-what-they-call-it-today> web server to provide
> the necessary PAC file, and to configure named properly. Trying to do
> an end-run around the WPAD design (regardless of what one might think
> of the 'design') seems like a long-term mistake to me.
What do you mean by providing tools to set up Apache or
other web server? Is it really inside the scope of NWAM?
And by configuring named, do you mean to run named locally
and have an entry for wpad.<domain> so that those apps using
WPAD with DNS will resolve the wpad name to localhost? Then
the apps will contact the local web server to retrieve the
PAC file?
> I think you're trying to work around a missing bit of infrastructure.
> Though it might help some folks in the short term, I don't see why
> that's really the right strategy in the long term, and it seems to me
> that it has some unfortunate failure modes. (Such as potentially
> _breaking_ WPAD operation if NWAM's mediation mechanism gets it
> wrong.)
OK.
> My proposal: configure named, configure Apache, go have coffee. ;-}
This is fine. We just need to make sure that we have a good
answer for the expected question "Why doesn't Firefox use the
proxy info specified in NWAM ;-)"
--
K. Poon.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
