SYSML16 — Proxy port “complete” specification (§ 9.3.2.12):

if a proxy port P1 has a nested proxy port P1::P2 and both are non-behavioral, does it mean that both P1 and P1::P2 must be explicitly connected to internal parts? If P1 is just a logical group of nested proxy ports, there may be no sense to connect P1 per se internally (but it makes sense to connect P1 externally).

Clarification

§9.3.2.12 “ProxyPort”, states the following:
1. “Completely specified proxy ports must be connected to internal parts or be behavioral ”
2. “Internal connectors to ports are the ones inside the port’s owner (specifically, they are the ones that do not have a UML partwithPort on the connector end linked to the port, assuming NestedConnectorEnd is not applied to that end, or if NestedConnectorEnd is applied to that end, they are the connectors that have only ports in the property path of that end) ”
3. “When a proxy port is connected to multiple internal parts, the connectors have the same semantics as a single binding connector to an aggregate of those parts, supporting all their features, and treating flows and invocations from outside the aggregate as if they were to those parts, and flows and invocations it receives from those parts as if they were to the outside ”
4. “This aggregate is not a separate element of the system, and only groups the internal parts for purposes of binding to the proxy port ”
YBE: according to the above, we can infer that a proxy port which is no more than an aggregate of its nested ports is “completely specified” if all its nested ports are either connected to internal part or behavioral