Now, one thing we should consider is whether we want to support
specifying proxyHost, proxyPort via system properties, just like Socket
does. In that case I don't think it will be as simple as wrapping like
suggested above. Maybe we could support this by having some kind of
factory which looks at the system properties?
Lóránt Pintér wrote:
However, I'd vote for supporting proxyHost and such, because there are a
lot of legacy systems out there moving to MINA. When they finally
migrate to MINA, their users don't really want to know about the change,
and don't expect changes in the configuration of the system.
I think all of these systems will then create something like
LegacyProxyConnector inherited from ProxyingConnector, and set the proxy
parameters from proxyHost etc. As I think a lot of people would
implement this redundantly, MINA could have it out of the box as well.