OPES/SMTP scope

Martin,

	Thanks for clarifying AP#4 and response modification cases. We may have a  
scope problem here, similar to what we had with HTTP when we realized that  
we have to deal with 1xx responses. OPES/HTTP scope is adaptation of a  
single HTTP request or a single HTTP response augmented by request info.
In OPES/SMTP, we currently seem to be talking about adapting a single SMTP  
command or a single SMTP command response (augmented by the corresponding  
command info, I guess?). Is that the right scope? It was reasonable to  
limit OPES/HTTP scope to request/response because HTTP is mostly stateless  
(and OPES is not allowed to adapt HTTP connections which are kind of  
statefull in HTTP). However, could it be a design mistake to introduce the  
same scope boundaries for adaptation of a stateful SMTP dialog? It seems  
to me that results/information from earlier commands would have to be  
known to OPES callout servers adapting later commands. Should OPES/SMTP  
scope be an entire dialog related to a "single" email (and not a single  
command from that dialog)?? Can a callout server reliably adapt an SMTP  
dialog by modifying isolated commands, without controlling and knowing the  
entire command sequence??
What is the primary difference between OPES/SMTP and Milter approach: If  
we wrap Milter calls in OCP, would we get OPES/SMTP?
Thank you,

Alex.