observation/question on partial replication

[Dan Shriver <dshriver@sharemedia.com>]

If I have a directory setup where the slaves each contain a data
that are non-overlaping subtrees in the master (all the slaves
put together do not necessarily = the master though) I can only
get replication to function if I do the following:
	1) load master .dbb with replicant(s) for binding to
	   slave
	2) load master .dbb with the branch points to each of
	   the subtrees I am interested in replicating
	3) copy master .dbb's to slave(s)

I do not understand why step 2 is required (once the replicant
is populated I should be able to push down any relevant changes
to the slaves).  It seems that the slave (not having the branch
to put data on has nothing "to attach data" to, even if you are
trying to skip step 2 by replicating the branch down.

Step 2 is very non-inutitive in my opinion.  Furthermore, I
think openLDAP would be easier (and less spooky) if copying
.dbb's was not necessary (eliminate step 1 also) especially
since copying .dbb's can cause data corruption.  I know the
people who did us all a great service by making this cool
product are very busy with big issues, so I'd just like to put
in this request for when they have time.

Now I have to try to get Netscape's Directory server to this
point (and I'm sure that will be an even less intutitive
process- thankfully openLDAP exists), in the interest of
testing.

-Dan