[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Initial "strawman" I-Ds revising LDAPv3
At 04:38 PM 10/28/00 +0100, David Chadwick wrote:
>whilst I agree with virtually all that you say above, point c) could be
>a large amount of work (i.e. if you mean importation)
Just to clarify... I don't mean importation of the ITU X.500
I was referring only to dependent LDAP/X.500 technical specifications
documented in RFCs and referenced by the LDAPv3 "core" specification.
For example, RFC 2252's reference to RFC 1274 needs to be "cut"
(dependency removed) or "absorbed" (dependent specification