Subject: [end points comm] OPES System

From: "Abbie Barbir" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:23:51 -0400

All,

I am Re-Reading this thread as I am working on the next version of the
draft. 
I really can not come up with a conclusion as to what the WG has decided.

Can each please resubmit thier final opnion. I will then come up with text
and put it for voting.

Abbie

---

From: Alex Rousskov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:36:07 -0600 (MDT)

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Abbie Barbir wrote:

> I am Re-Reading this thread as I am working on the next version of
> the draft.  I really can not come up with a conclusion as to what
> the WG has decided.
>
> Can each please resubmit thier final opnion. I will then come up
> with text and put it for voting.

In my opinion, all MUST-level tracing requirements must be limited to
an OPES System. We would need to define an OPES system. The current
"IAB treatment" draft (the IP Addressing section) can be used as a
starting point:

	An OPES System is a collection of OPES
	entities that is directly addressable
	on IP level by an end user.

This is just a starting point: We would need to apply the same logic
to client-side systems and polish.

SHOULD- and MAY-level tracing requirements can refer to OPES
processors, callout services, and other OPES entities. We can deal
with the exact definitions and SHOULDs later.

The primary question is whether tracing MUST be supported below the
System level. I say "no" because it is never essential for the other
side to know details of System configuration and because it is often
impractical for the System to provide such details.

Alex.