[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-17.txt [corrected]
I agree completely with Kurt.
Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
At 08:46 PM 10/21/2003, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
"Steven Legg" <firstname.lastname@example.org> 10/5/03 11:50:20 PM >>>
4.6. Modify Operation
Parameters of the Modify Request are:
- object: The object to be modified. The value of this field
contains the DN of the entry to be modified. The server will
SHALL NOT ?
These are all on many operations. I think SHALL NOT is too strong. I
suspect there are implementations that allow the alias to be
dereferenced (whether by control, local policy, or both).
Do you think there is an interoperability issue here? If so, would
SHOULD NOT suffice?
I think, no. A server which deferences the alias not only
prevents modification of the the alias object, it might
(quite inappropriately) modify the aliased object. A
SHALL NOT here is appropriate as without it one could
not administrate alias objects in an interoperable fashion.
This applies to all other update operations as well.