Re: Comment on I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ldapbis-dn-08.txt

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 08:13 AM 2002-08-28, David Chadwick wrote:
>I dont like the general thrust of this ID regarding the use of alternate
>DN strings.
>
>I would like the following text from 2.3 to be struck out of the current
>ID, as it unduly prejudices the use of additiional DN strings
>
>"As no extension could reasonable require all existing
>      implementations be updated to recognize additional type name
>      strings, this table is not extensible."

The phrase "This table is not extensible" is necessary for
interoperability of the RECOMMENDED algorithm.  The "As
no extension could... " part was intended only to explain
why the table isn't extensible, not to unduly prejudices
the use of additional DN strings (beyond that detailed in
5.3).  I am fine with striking the "As ...," part.

I'll comment separately on your section 5.3 suggestion.

Kurt