Jeoff Wilks wrote:
>Interesting paper, and one I had not seen before (as a relative newcomer to
>One possible addition to your work: since many clients sit behind firewalls,
>it seems that HTTP proxying would need to be extended for notification
>purposes as well. For example, a firewalled sink is unable to receive
>notifications directly. As an alternative, it could maintain a connection
>with a proxy server, and receive its notifications via that server.
Let's say there is a proxy sitting on the corporate firewall, and the
proxy is able to initiate traffic within the firewall. Using my
handshake, the client would send a callback URI which was hosted by the
proxy server, then arrange for a pickup from the proxy using the
Such a proxy would indeed be a lot like http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-proxy.