There was some question about what we intended with
respect to mobility. This seems to be an artifact
of the way I write these sort of specifications...
If, from a requirements perspective, the architecture
must do/support/provide/etc some feature, FOO, then the
spec will say "The architecture MUST do FOO". That means
that FOO has to be done.
If, from a requirements perspective, the architecture
is forbidden to do FOO then we say "The architecture
MUST NOT do FOO"
If we really do not care whether the architecture does
something or not then either we don't mention it at all
or say "The architecture MAY do FOO". Obviously we can
not list all the things that we don't care whether the
architecture does or does not do... The list would indeed
be very very long...
Frank Kastenholz
=======================================
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information, including without
limitation, Confidential and/or Proprietary Information belonging to
Unisphere Networks, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
message.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT