[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: LDAP URI scheme that specify alternative transport protocols

To: mcs@netscape.com (Mark C Smith)
Subject: Re: LDAP URI scheme that specify alternative transport protocols
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 15:19:05 -0800
Cc: ietf-LDAPext@netscape.com
In-reply-to: <38454708.EC230EBB@netscape.com>
References: <38449096.9521B753@boolean.net>
Resent-date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 15:23:28 -0800 (PST)
Resent-from: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
Resent-message-id: <"dxO0yD.A.XjF.l3aR4"@glacier>
Resent-sender: ietf-ldapext-request@netscape.com

At 11:04 AM 12/1/99 -0500, Mark C Smith wrote:
>I agree -- this is a general problem.  And therefore I think it should
>be handled in a URI-focused group.  This same issue must've been
>discussed by those who worked on RFC 2396.  Certainly if you extend the
>generic URI syntax, 2396 will need to be updated.

I agree that extensions to RFC2296 should be discussed
in a URI-focused group.  Does any one suggests on a more
appropriate forum for such?

References:
- Re: LDAP URI scheme that specify alternative transport protocols
  - From: mcs@netscape.com (Mark C Smith)

Prev by Date: Re: LDAP URI scheme that specify alternative transport protocols
Next by Date: LDAP URI extensions for SASL/StartTLS
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread