Jfc,
good points. This is in-line with what I had in mine.
So what are the requirements that we should impose on an OPES system?
Abbie
-----Original Message-----
From: jfcm [mailto:info(_at_)utel(_dot_)net]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 3:40 PM
To: Markus Hofmann; OPES Group
Subject: Re: [end points comm] OPES System
At 17:34 11/08/03, Markus Hofmann wrote:
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?
I do not see why who is providing what would structurally
interfere with
the definition of a system.
An OPES system is a system organized by someone to offer one
or a set of
edge services. If in so doing it uses thousand resources by a
single or by
thousand providers has no structural impact and should have
no effect on
the result. However who the someone is (user, called
service, third party,
community) may have an influence on the global nature of the system.
An OPES domain maybe of interest to define the parts of an
OPES system by a
given operator, but we have to make clear that such an OPES
domain may not
be a sub-OPES system.
jfc