[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: current control combination proposals
- To: "Chris Ridd" <chris.ridd@isode.com>
- Subject: RE: current control combination proposals
- From: "Ramsay, Ron" <Ron.Ramsay@ca.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 17:03:09 +1000
- Cc: <ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org>
- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
- Thread-index: AcQ71XQt35qGfYimS6SR9UdGkT4L/AAB1iZQ
- Thread-topic: current control combination proposals
No, not "so far".
If LDAP is to remain aligned with, or at least interoperable with, X.500, then constraintViolation has to remain an update problem.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Ridd [mailto:chris.ridd@isode.com]
Sent: Monday, 17 May 2004 16:08
To: Ramsay, Ron
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
Subject: Re: current control combination proposals
On 17/5/04 2:44 am, Ramsay, Ron <Ron.Ramsay@ca.com> wrote:
> constrainViolation is only appropriate for update operations.
So far.
Cheers,
Chris