RE: draft-ietf-opes-smtp-use-cases-01

Hector,

>	I have a few comments.
Thank you.
	
>	1) Consistency comment,  
>	
>	section 3.1.1 says:
>	
>	   (S: means sender, R: means recipient): 
>	
>	I think most RFC examples, if not all, use the "S - server,  C:
- client" nomenclature.
>	The current usage makes one think too hard :-)
>	
>	It also says:
>	
>	  The sender is generating commands and the recipient 
>	  is generating replies. 
>	
>	This think it should be rephrased:
>	    
>	  The client (C:) is issueing SMTP commands and the 
>	  server (S:) is generating responses.
>	 
>	and rephrase the reminding paragraph accordingly.

Good hint. I will change accordingly.

>
>	2) General Comment
>	
>	While I think it is nice to describe specific 'examples' on how
OPES may be used in SMTP,
>	I think the more important consideration is the interface
considerations.  
>	[...]

Certainly, interface considerations are most important and the fun stuff
to talk about when we want to create the OCP/SMTP profile. The -00
version of the draft wanted to prepare that work and went the direction
you discribe.
But the clear feedback was to have the use case draft be a use case
draft and list and explain very concrete use cases. The draft will then
be used to define the scope which will us then allow to specify the
interface subsequently.

Regards
Martin