Ian,
As I mentioned in the meeting, I don't believe that the change to
"endpoint" is useful.
I agree, and it became obvious at the meeting that most didn't like
the change neither. It will be change back.
This is a weak attempt at addressing the concerns over "end-to-end", though
I agree it's very good to be explicit in identifying that the OPES systems
are explicitly addressed.
The goal is to clarify the "end-to-end" issue with respect to the
network level. Previous discussions showed that it was not clear to
everybody that OPES will NOT divert an IP packet from its intended
destination. Instead, OPES devices terminate a transport connection
(or act as a final destination for UDP packets) - just as the nodes in
an overlay.
As mentioned previously, there are application level/content end-to-end
concerns over deploying such an architecture - inherent in an overlay
network environment. Please be aware of *that* end-to-end issue when
stating reference to RFC1958.
Check out Section 4.1 from draft-carpenter-midtax-02.txt - we tried to
align the refered statement to that.
-Markus