Re: Referral chasing mistery

[Stig Venaas <Stig.Venaas@uninett.no>]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:30:43PM +0000, Konstantin Chuguev wrote:
> I see. I thought that if it is possible to use the URL form both with and
> without "/" after the ldap://[host], then ldap://[host] means "same base"
> while ldap://[host]/ means "root base". Nothing in the standard actually says
> that, and nothing explains the difference between the two forms :-(
> And nothing allows to use referrals to root naming contexts with the base
> scope then. Which is no good!
> Is there any way to save the standard-conformant clients of choking in such
> cases? Bet they are not common but still...

I agree, it would be nice to distinguish the two. The spec isn't quite
clear, but I don't think you can. Perhaps the spec could be made a bit
clearer as part of the bis-work. I hope Kurt can comment, perhaps should
ask about this on the bis-list? Perhaps the semantics for referral and
reference should be the same.

In my opinion you should never (at least not when you might be refered
to) have empty base though.

Stig