GO-MHS and the central coordination point

Urs Eppenberger <Eppenberger@switch.ch> Thu, 15 April 1993 11:02 UTC

X400-Received: by mta mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu in /PRMD=XNREN/ADMD= /C=US/; Relayed; Thu, 15 Apr 1993 06:00:49 +0000
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 06:00:49 +0000
X400-Originator: cargille@cs.wisc.edu
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=XNREN/ADMD= /C=US/; mhs-relay..689:15.03.93.11.00.49]
Priority: Non-Urgent
DL-Expansion-History: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu ; Thu, 15 Apr 1993 06:00:48 +0000;
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Urs Eppenberger <Eppenberger@switch.ch>
Message-ID: <1440*/S=Eppenberger/O=switch/PRMD=SWITCH/ADMD=ARCOM/C=CH/@MHS>
To: ietf-osi-x400ops <ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu>
Subject: GO-MHS and the central coordination point

Hi Jim,

> ==> Hi Urs,
> 
>     My comments follow relating to the discussion about GO MHS...
> 
>     '.....work our procedures to join,.....'
> 
>     I wasn't quite clear I understood the above (me missing it I guess),
>     so I thought it would be easier if I just wrote how I recall the
>     discussion. I think it went something like......
> 
>     o  it is seems like a good idea to merge the COSINE MHS and GO MHS services.
> 
>     o  however before rushing into this, as it seems quite a large step, it
>        would be a good idea that the group understand what the 
>        consequences/issues of such a merge would be. As no one seemed to 
>        have a clue of what this meant in practice and no one had seen any 
>        details on this, someone (Urs as the proposer??) should right these 
>        down on a piece of paper. Some things mentioned that need to be 
>        addressed are,
>        o  what does such a merge mean in terms of policy control? i.e. who or
>           what does this service report to? e.g. RARE OU, IETF X.400 OPS, etc
>        o  how can it remain open if people have to pay (hard one :-)).
'open' and 'free of charge' are not synonyms. 
(It would be quiet a push for OSI software if one gets it at no cost.)
You used 'remain open' in your question which indicates that there has been
something open before. The COSINE-MHS project assisted all networks which
wanted to join because we felt it advantageous for everybody. The COSINE-MHS
project was aimed for the European networks only but we just did not ask for
permission so we got no answer, simple old trick.
Everybody including SWITCH will save money if someone offers to do the job
for free, please please, show up.

>        o  maybe splitting of the coordination part provided by the project
>           team into various parts i.e. mapping table coordination, assisting
>           new services, etc., to reduce the cost makes sense.
Splitting never reduces overal cost, this is an old management rule.

Kind regards,

Urs.

GO-MHS and the central coordination point Urs Eppenberger
Re: GO-MHS and the central coordination point (Jim Romaguera)
Re: x400ops minutes, GO-MHS and the central coord… Allan Cargille