Markus,
SO are we saying that the system is static or the OPES flow can be
dynamically decided (based on a user profile for eample)
ABbie
-----Original Message-----
From: Markus Hofmann [mailto:markus(_at_)mhof(_dot_)com]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 11:35 AM
To: OPES Group
Subject: Re: [end points comm] OPES System
Abbie,
sure, so here's my understanding so far:
An "OPES system" describes the collection of all OPES
entities (i.e.
OPES processors and callout servers) that are operated by a single
provider (or, alternatively: ...within a single trust domain).
If this describes what an "OPES system" was meant to be, I somehow
don't like the term too much. Maybe the term "OPES domain" would be
appropriate?
-Markus
Abbie Barbir wrote:
Markisn
That is the main problem. We need a formal definition,
since we refere
to it a lot in the draft.
Abbie
-----Original Message-----
From: Markus Hofmann [mailto:markus(_at_)mhof(_dot_)com]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 10:52 AM
To: OPES Group
Subject: Re: [end points comm] OPES System
Abbie Barbir wrote:
To start off the discussion, can we state that an OPES
system is the
collection of entities that perform OPES transformations on a
request/responce within an OPES flow?
Isn't there somewhere an assumption in the drafts that an "OPES
System" describes OPES entities that are operated (or belong) to a
single operatore/trustdomain/carrier?
Thanks,
Markus