Michael,

Thanks for responding. Please see my comments inline.

Thanks Archana

UsageSpecification::= sequence { sendTo ElementIdentifier ..., sendToDomainIdentifier AliasAddress }

The domainIdentifier field will provide the following:

(a) an indication of which domain is to receive the usageIndications (b) a resolvable address (either an explicit IP address, or something like a URL or email address that can be resolved to one or more border element addresses within the target domain)

Any comments?

[Archana Nehru] I am not clear how we can use one field "sendToDomainIdentifier" to contain both (a and b) information. Since "AliasAddress" is currently defined as a "choice", would not we then need one more parameter in the usage specification structure to indicate the second parameter(either a or b)?

But before we come to a solution for this problem, I think we need to answer one more question which is: " what is the purpose of including a "domainId" and "Border element identifier" in the usage specfication message? How is a receiving BE supposed to interpret and use this information? If these two together do not give us a "resolvable" address, then why not add a field for a "resolvable address" only?

Oddly enough Annex G specs does not discuss the purpose of exchanging (for that matter even for having) fields like "domainId" and "border element identifier" at all. So I guess we need to clarify this issue first and once we are clear with that , we can suitable fields to the "usageSpecification" structure.

Please let me know what you think.