-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Rousskov [mailto:rousskov(_at_)measurement-factory(_dot_)com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 1:38 PM
To: OPES WG
Subject: RE: feedback on draft-ietf-opes-end-comm-04
SNIP
I am talking about specific requirements you have in the
draft. There is no "OPES tracing is a MUST" requirement.
However, there is a requirement quoted above that implies
that an OPES System MUST trace every OPES processor. Since
OPES System has to delegate actual actions to processors, the
above really means that an OPES processor MUST trace itself.
There is also a requirement on page 6 that "OPES processor
SHOULD add its entry to the trace". For me, there is a
requirement level conflict here. Either it is a SHOULD or a
MUST, it cannot be both.
Ok, I see.
I could make it both a SHOULD. But does this result that tracing in the
system is not a MUST.
Each OPES processor MUST support tracing, policy can be used to
turn tracing on and to determine its granularity.
I continue to note that the above requirement does not make much
sense to me. If a policy can be used, can I use a policy
that always
turns tracing off and have that as the only, hard-coded policy? I
think this is a failed attempt to appear directly
compliant with an
IAB consideration and it should be removed.
Alex, if your ploicy trun all processor off, then u r not compliant.
Why? I am not violating the "support" requirement above.
Alex.
If tracing is off for all, then u r not supporting tracing.
Abbie