[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Protocol: confusing continuation references instruction
Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>
> In 4.5.3 of [Protocol], there is the statement:
>
> > In the absence of indexing information provided to a server from
> > servers holding subordinate naming contexts, SearchResultReference
> > responses are not affected by search filters and are always returned
> > when in scope.
>
> Anyone have an idea what this means?
>
> My best guess is that some implementations may hold a copy of some amount
> of data held in a subordinate naming context (via whatever mechanism they
> choose--not just "indexing"). And if those servers can use the search
> filter to determine that there are no entries in the subordinate naming
> context, it does not need to send a continuation reference for the
> subordinate DSA(s).
Yes, at the time this was written CIP had been recently discussed as a way
of distributing indexes between directory servers to cut down on the number
of servers that would need to be contacted for broad-scope searches.
"indexing" is just an example, I agree this can be broadened.
Mark Wahl
Sun Microsystems Inc.