[Posted on behalf of Peter Lane]

I disagree with the decision to move all the attributes into the BES-Management schema. This leaves me unable to, for 
example, only support the BES-Factory interface since all the useful information is missing from the port type that 
defines the essential operations. My understanding was that supporting both port types was optional, but doing it this 
way essentially contradicts that statement. I'll put it another way: this information is not "management" data in terms 
of managing the BES service itself (what the BES-Management port type was intended for). The attributes relate to 
management of the underlying compute resources and the activities that are using them. That's exactly what the factory 
interface is for. So I don't particularly care if the attributes all remain in one schema or not, but I feel strongly 
that the schema they are in should be the factory schema.