Re: Equally capable referrals

["Steve Sonntag" <vtag@novell.com>]

I have some concerns about loosening the wording.

This puts a burden on the application or the API when following referrals.
It is not enough to find a server that exists, but the server must ―
--process the search with the referral dn and return
   a non zero result code?
   (the dn must exist and the application must be able to read the root
    dn?)
--If the application/API gets a non zero return code, should it try the
  next referral in the list if there is one?

But, I can see a case where the administrator gives a valid DN, but no
Entries are on the server under the base DN.  It looks to the application
like everything succeeded, but in reality the data was not on that server.
I think loosening the wording dilutes the value of referrals.

What behavior do we expect of applications  when servers
are encountered that cannot process the referral, and how does the
application determine that the server could not follow the referral.

--Steve

>>> Stig Venaas <Stig.Venaas@uninett.no> 06-Nov-01 3:07:56 PM >>>
On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 03:36:37PM -0500, Timothy Hahn wrote:
> Jim,
> 
> Could we possibly just "loosen up" the statement from 'equally capable' to 
> 'possibly capable'?
> 
> If not, then we might as well strike the sentence.  This does leave 
> implementers "hanging" though in terms of what is intended but not 
> necessarily written.

Agree completely, I don't like it the way it is currently.

Stig