[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: protocol: "outstanding" operations
- To: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
- Subject: Re: protocol: "outstanding" operations
- From: Hallvard B Furuseth <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:34:15 +0200
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <HBF.email@example.com> <HBF.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Well, Jim is back, I believe. I'll begin small:-)
Roger, note that Authmeth has two 'outstanding's too.
Looking a bit closer at the texts, I think only the 'outstanding' in
[Protocol] 220.127.116.11 (Message ID) is not self-explanatory.
Here is a possible replacement text:
A client MUST NOT reuse a previous request's message ID in the
same LDAP exchange until it knows that the server has completed
or successfully abandoned the operation.
Or maybe s/successfully abandoned/discarded/.
If anyone feels like replacing the others, here are some suggestions.
And two non-suggestions for Abandon; I like 'outstanding' better than
the replacement texts I could think of:
4.2.1 (Processing of the Bind Request):
4.3 (Unbind Operation):
4.4.1 (Notice of Disconnection):
4.11 (Abandon Operation):
Not s/outstanding/previous/ (server side), that implies operations that
have responded too. Not 'uncompleted previous', that looks a bit like
the server must at least have started to process the operation.
4.14.3 (Removal of the TLS Layer):
5.1 (Operation and LDAP exchange Relationship):
s/outstanding/remaining/ (server side and client side).
A.2 (Result Codes#operationsError):
s/while there are other operations outstanding/
before all previous operations have completed/ ?
[Authmeth] 3.1.1 (Start TLS Request):
> A client may send the Start TLS extended request at any time after
> establishing an LDAP connection, except:
- when previous requests remain for the server to process on
the same LDAP exchange.
> The result of violating any of these requirements is a resultCode of
> operationsError, as described in [Protocol] section 18.104.22.168. Client
> implementers should note that it is possible to receive a resultCode
> of success for a Start TLS operation that is sent on a connection
> with outstanding LDAP operations if the server has sufficient time
s/outstanding LDAP operations/remaining previous requests/.
> to process them prior to its receiving the Start TLS request.
> Implementors of clients should ensure that they do not inadvertently
> depend upon this race condition.
Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>At 04:13 AM 5/19/2004, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>>> A recent poster to the OpenLDAP-software list had not understood what an
>>> outstanding operation is. Maybe [protocol] should define it at the time
>>> of first use. Something like this:
>>> at the server: a request which is being or waiting to be processed.
>>> at the client: as above,
>>including requests sent by the client which the server has not yet
>>> , or an operation for which the server has
>>> sent a response which the client has not yet received.
>>It gets a bit cumbersome, I'm afraid.
> That's my fear. Are such clarifications going cause more
>>Improvements are welcome:-)
> My suggestion would be avoiding the need to define the
> term. Instead, I would try to reword any sentence which
> used the phrase "outstanding operation" (or "outstanding
> request") to be reasonable clear without having to
> rely on separately stated terminology definitions.