[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Issues regarding LDAP Control
Kurt,
Your suggestion of using:
A control only alters the semantics of the
message it attached to.
Looks OK to me.
Thanks,
Tim Hahn
Internet: hahnt@us.ibm.com
Internal: Timothy Hahn/Endicott/IBM@IBMUS or IBMUSM00(HAHNT)
phone: 607.752.6388 tie-line: 8/852.6388
fax: 607.752.3681
"Kurt D. Zeilenga"
<Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> To: Timothy Hahn/Endicott/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
owner-ietf-ldapbis@O Subject: Re: Issues regarding LDAP Control
penLDAP.org
03/14/2002 12:37 AM
At 07:45 PM 2002-03-13, Timothy Hahn wrote:
>This likely should be generalized to apply to both request
>and response controls. Maybe something like:
> Controls which are sent as part of a LDAP PDU apply
> only to that PDU and are not saved.
><TJH>
>I guess I see this as "overly restrictive". Why couldn't some control,
>specified as a part of one request, have "semantics" that made the
>effect of the control apply to other requests that come later in
>the connection stream? If I'm reading the clarification right,
>it sounds like this would be DIS-allowed since the control that
>was sent as part of one LDAP PDU would "apply" to other PDUs.
></TJH>
Do you find the original text "overly restrictive" as well?
I don't think this or the original text was intended to
restrict the impact of an operation extended by zero or
more controls, but to restrict the impact of a control.
It can be said that a control only alters the semantics
of the message it is attached to. This is not to say
that this operation may impact the processing of other
operations.
Maybe this sentence should be replaced with that, e.g.:
A control only alters the semantics of the
message it attached to.
Kurt