Re: <draft-ietf-ldapbis-dn-07.txt>

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 08:12 AM 2002-04-01, David Chadwick wrote:
>I know that I am opening an old discussion here that took place last
>year,

I agree that that this discussion has already taken place.
Here is a summary of what I believe, as document editor
(e.g. not chair), is WG consensus with regards to
draft-ietf-ldapbis-dn-xx.txt.

We discussed what RFC 2253 meant when it said a 'published table'
and why interoperability depended on protocol peers using a
common table.  I believe the WG consensus was that RFC 2253
should be clarified that 'published table' is that table it
provides.  The WG also reached consensus that 'alternative tables'
could be used between agreeing protocol peers.  The DN I-D
reflects this consensus.

Kurt