> >seems like the operations should be enabled only by affirmative consent, > >rather than requiring parties to veto them. > > Interesting idea but not necessarily in the scope of OPES. the point I was trying to make is that the services which OPES enable should not be interposed between provider and audience without affirmative consent by at least one of those parties - as opposed to a model in which the services could be interposed by a third partry without either of the endpoints' explicit consent as long as neither endpoint specifically objected. Keith
- Re: opes and technology picks Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: opes and technology picks Eliot Lear
- Re: opes and technology picks Valdis . Kletnieks
- RE: opes and technology picks Tony Hain
- Re: opes and technology picks Keith Moore
- Re: opes and technology picks Brian E Carpenter
- Re: opes and technology picks Markus Hofmann
- Re: opes and technology picks Brian E Carpenter
- Re: opes and technology picks Keith Moore
- Re: opes and technology picks Michael W. Condry
- Re: opes and technology picks Keith Moore
- Re: opes and technology picks Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: opes and technology picks Michael W. Condry
- Re: opes and technology picks Keith Moore
- Re: opes and technology picks Michael W. Condry
- Re: opes and technology picks Scott Brim
- Re: opes and technology picks Keith Moore
- Re: opes and technology picks Michael W. Condry
- Re: opes and technology picks Eliot Lear
- Re: opes and technology picks Vernon Schryver
- Re: opes and technology picks Keith Moore
