2011/2/24 Thomas Mangin <thomas.man...@exa-networks.co.uk>:
> Non, c'est très diffèrent techniquement ... expliquer la différence prendrait
> bien trop de temps.
En fait, la solution technique est plus ou moins la même (j'ai vu en production
deux variantes) mais la plus grande différence entre la RFC 6108 et Phorm
(ou une autre solution d'insertion de contenu en HTTP) est simplement ceci:
"""
R3.1.12. Advertising Replacement or Insertion Must Not Be Performed
Under ANY Circumstances
Additional Background: The system must not be used to
replace any advertising provided by a website, or to insert
advertising into websites. This therefore includes cases
where a web page already has space for advertising, as well
as cases where a web page does not have any advertising.
This is a critical area of concern for end users, privacy
advocates, and other members of the Internet community.
Therefore, it must be made abundantly clear that this
system will not be used for such purposes.
"""
La différence est simplement la finalité et non la technologie utilisée.
Bonne journée,
adulau
--
-- Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) -- http://www.foo.be/
-- http://www.foo.be/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/Diary
-- "Knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance
-- that we can solve them" Isaac Asimov
---------------------------
Liste de diffusion du FRnOG
http://www.frnog.org/
