}
}
```

### Rewriting Responses

Symmetrically, interceptors can rewrite response headers and transform the response body. This is generally more dangerous than rewriting request headers because it may violate the webserver's expectations!

 * elements, if there is no comparator) to test element equality. As a result, if the comparator is
 * not consistent with equals, some of the standard implementations may violate the {@code Set}
 * contract.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods and the collection views they return are not guaranteed to be
 * thread-safe, even when all of the methods that they depend on are thread-safe.
 *

 * instances.
 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> The comparators or comparables used must be <i>consistent with equals</i> as
 * explained by the {@link Comparable} class specification. Otherwise, the resulting multiset will
 * violate the general contract of {@link SetMultimap}, which is specified in terms of {@link
 * Object#equals}.
 *
 * <p>The collections returned by {@code keySet} and {@code asMap} iterate through the keys

   * level than the whole method but without performing a runtime null check. That way, we can still
   * pass null inputs to LegacyConverter, and it can violate the contract of Converter.
   *
   * TODO(cpovirk): Could this be simplified if we modified implementations of LegacyConverter to
   * override methods (probably called "unsafeDoForward" and "unsafeDoBackward") with the same

Quite the opposite - an *aggressively* small feature set is the key feature that makes ztunnel viable.
It very intentionally does not offer L7 (HTTP) functionality, for instance, which would likely violate some of the goals above, without contributing to them.
Instead, the rich functionality that service mesh is traditionally associated with is deferred to the waypoints.

 * equivalence of instances.
 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> The comparison must be <i>consistent with equals</i> as explained by the
 * {@link Comparable} class specification. Otherwise, the resulting multiset will violate the {@link
 * java.util.Collection} contract, which is specified in terms of {@link Object#equals}.
 *
 * <p>See the Guava User Guide article on <a href=

 * equivalence of instances.
 *
 * <p><b>Warning:</b> The comparison must be <i>consistent with equals</i> as explained by the
 * {@link Comparable} class specification. Otherwise, the resulting multiset will violate the {@link
 * java.util.Collection} contract, which is specified in terms of {@link Object#equals}.
 *
 * <p>See the Guava User Guide article on <a href=

   *
   * <p><b>Warning:</b> when this method is used, the resulting cache will use identity ({@code ==})
   * comparison to determine equality of keys. Its {@link Cache#asMap} view will therefore
   * technically violate the {@link Map} specification (in the same way that {@link IdentityHashMap}
   * does).
   *
   * <p>Entries with keys that have been garbage collected may be counted in {@link Cache#size}, but

  }

  public void testCompound_instance() {
    Comparator<String> comparator = byCharAt(1).compound(byCharAt(0));
    testComparator(
        comparator,
        ImmutableList.of("red", "yellow", "violet", "blue", "indigo", "green", "orange"));
  }

  public void testCompound_instance_generics() {
    Ordering<Object> objects = Ordering.explicit((Object) 1);
    Ordering<Number> numbers = Ordering.explicit((Number) 1);

  }

  public void testCompound_instance() {
    Comparator<String> comparator = byCharAt(1).compound(byCharAt(0));
    testComparator(
        comparator,
        ImmutableList.of("red", "yellow", "violet", "blue", "indigo", "green", "orange"));
  }

  public void testCompound_instance_generics() {
    Ordering<Object> objects = Ordering.explicit((Object) 1);
    Ordering<Number> numbers = Ordering.explicit((Number) 1);