Re: ;binary migration solution

[d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk]

Date sent:      	Sat, 16 Nov 2002 22:39:04 -0700
From:           	"Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@novell.com>
To:             	<ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org>, <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Subject:        	Re: ;binary migration solution
Priority:       	non-urgent

> Unless some problem can  be shown, this is what I would prefer.

Jim

I am not sure that this solves the migration problem since you are giving rules 
that have to be obeyed by existing systems, which they cant do if they are not 
upgraded. My "control" solution did not effect existing systems, only new 
systems. This was the point in having a migration solution.

David
> 
> Jim
> 
> >>> Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no> 11/15/02 02:58AM >>>
> How about defining ;binary to do nothing, except that if the client
> requests ;binary on an attribute, it receives it with ;binary (whether
> or not the attribute was added with a ;binary option)?
> 
> Also, maybe if an attribute was added with ;binary but the client
> requests the attribute without ;binary, it receives it without ;binary.
> 
> -- 
> Hallvard
> 
> 
>