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

Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide

To: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
Subject: Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:46:34 -0700
Cc: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.0.20000815131059.00afb6f0@pop.walltech.com>
References: <3999815E.17708.6B62923@localhost> <4.3.2.7.0.20000814173708.00b0eef0@router.boolean.net> <4.3.2.7.0.20000814173220.00af81d0@pop.walltech.com>

At 01:29 PM 8/15/00 -0700, Bruce Greenblatt wrote:
>... and unsolicited, unsupported controls are always ignored by the client.

The server MUST assume that an unsupported control received by
the client will cause undefined behavior as RFC2251 does not
define the behavior.  Hence, a server SHOULD NOT sent any
control to the client for which it does not known (via
whatever means) the client supports.

Kurt

References:
- Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide
  - From: "David Chadwick" <d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk>
- Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
- Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Duplicate entries filter
Next by Date: C API I-D
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread