[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: new internet draft - LDAP Extensions Style Guide
> I would not say that it is "a nonsense".
I thought I had given a good example of where it was not a sensible
strategy to be adopted by a server, for example, using the duplicate
entries control in a Search result when the client did not ask for it on
the Search request, but had said on the Bind that it can support this
control. It is completely inappropriate in my opinion for the Server to
spontaneously change the behaviour of an operation without being
asked to by the client.
My viewpoint is that a control is a "tweak" on an operation asked
for by the client, and the server may be able to offer this "tweaked"
service or not. But the server must always offer the standard
service if no tweak is requested.
> The alternatives are I see it are:
>
> - don't ever let the client tell the server
> - include a list of acceptable controls with each operation request,
> assuming that the server is really stupid, and
> can't remember the list from one operation to the next.
> - define a new extended operation that allows the client to submit a
> list of acceptable controls
there is the obvious alternative missing from your list, which we
have now, ie. the client specifies which control it wants on each
individual operation :-)
David
***************************************************
David Chadwick
IS Institute, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT
Tel +44 161 295 5351 Fax +44 161 745 8169
Mobile +44 790 167 0359
Email D.W.Chadwick@salford.ac.uk
Home Page http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/chadwick.htm
Understanding X.500 http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/X500.htm
X.500/LDAP Seminars http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/seminars.htm
Entrust key validation string MLJ9-DU5T-HV8J
***************************************************