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@xxxxxxxx]
> 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@xxxxxxxx]
> >>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
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>