|
I've re-added these, and will wait for WG consensus to remove them. >>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> 10/29/04 2:23:39 PM >>> As chair, I note that the WG did specifically discussed adding these constraints to the revised ASN.1 module, initially during a [Filter] WGLC and then during a early [Protocol] WGLC. Based on these prior discussions, and the fact that an issue was not raised during the prior WGLC, I must assume that the consensus of the WG is for the and/or Filter sets to explicitly include SIZE (1..MAX) constraints in the ASN.1 module. Hence, I feel obligated assume consensus supports keeping these constraints. It seems however that some have raised "new" concerns supporting dropping the SIZE (1..MAX) constraints, however, it not quite clear what that concern is. Hence, I suggest that those who support dropping these constraints based upon "new" concerns detail those concerns to the WG and why it is necessary (or appropriate) to drop these constraints. We'll discuss the "new" concerns and see if consensus now clearly supports dropping these constraints. In absence of a clear consensus to drop the constraints, the chairs will direct the Editor to include these constraints. Kurt, as LDAPBIS co-chair At 11:31 PM 10/28/2004, Jim Sermersheim wrote: >>> 4.5.1. Search Request >> >>> Filter ::= CHOICE { >>> and [0] SET OF filter Filter, >>> or [1] SET OF filter Filter, >> >>Another change I do not remember from the list: The SIZE (1..MAX) was >>removed from the ASN.1 grammar (though the textual description still >>requires at least one component). Why? >This is the way it was in RFC 2251. At some point, [protocol] added the SIZE (1..MAX) to the ASN.1 to make it consistent with the text. It was then found that this prevents Kurt's T/F filter spec from working without breaking protocol, so we removed the ASN.1 grammar. |