draft-ietf-ldapbis-url-04.txt comments

[Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>]

> 5.  URL Definition
> (...)
>   If an extension is unsupported by the client, the client MUST NOT
>   process the URL if the extension is critical.  If an unsupported
>   extension is non-critical, the client MUST ignore the extension.
>
>   If a critical extension cannot be processed successfully by the
>   client, the client MUST NOT process the URL. If a non-critical
>   extension cannot be processed successfully by the client, the client
>   SHOULD ignore the extension.

I'm not sure what the difference is between 'unsupported' and 'cannot be
processed successfully'?  These paragraphs seem to say the same thing
except that for the final MUST vs. SHOULD.


Editorial comments:

> 3.  Table of Contents
> (...)
> 5.1.      Escaping Using the Method.................................4
                             ^^^
                          Missing '%'.

> 6.  Defaults for Fields of the LDAP URL
> (...)
>   Note:  other documents MAY
>   specify different defaulting rules; for example, section 4.1.11 of
>   [Protocol] specifies a different rule for determining the correct DN
>   to use when it is absent in an LDAP URL that is returned as a
>   referral.

Section 4.1.10.

> 7.  Examples
> (...)
>  ldap://ldap3.example.com/o=Babsco,c=US???(four-octet=%5c00%5c00%5c00%5c04)
>  IP The filter in this example uses the LDAP escaping mechanism of \

Remove "IP".  Suggest to split the URL in front of one of the '?'s.

> 9.  Normative References
> (...)
>   [RFC3383] Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
>    Considerations for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
>   (LDAP)", RFC 3383, September 2002.

This should be draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-01.txt.

-- 
Hallvard