[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: Using DAP to support dynamic directories
Dear all,
>From a service provider viewpoint (BT), I would just like to support David
in his efforts to ensure a convergent evolution path for DAP and LDAP.
We need Both and this wait seems well worthwhile !!
Best regards
Marcus
****************************************************************************
*******************
Marcus Lasance
Designer, Directory Services
BT
Room 225, Anzani House
Trinity Avenue, Felixstowe
Telephone: 01394 693482
Fax: 01394 673482
Mobile: 0589 189222
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Chadwick [SMTP:d.w.chadwick@zetnet.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 1998 11:44 PM
> To: 'Tim Howes'; Yoram Yaacovi
> Cc: osidirectory@az05.bull.com; ietf-asid@netscape.com; 'ldapext'
> Subject: RE: Using DAP to support dynamic directories
>
> > From: Yoram Yaacovi <yoramy@MICROSOFT.com>
> > To: "'Tim Howes'" <howes@netscape.com>
> > Cc: "'D.W.Chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk'"
> <D.W.Chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk>,
> > osidirectory@az05.bull.com, ietf-asid@netscape.com,
> > "'ldapext'" <ietf-ldapext@netscape.com>
> > Subject: RE: Using DAP to support dynamic directories
> > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 15:10:02 -0800
>
> > I'd go with either option, but my personal preference would be a
> separate
> > document. This way we can get the dynamic entries draft out NOW. We can
> add
> > text in section 5.3 that will point to this future doc.
> >
>
> If you must have, and manage to get, the last call out this week,
> then I prefer a separate document for the DAP work. The reason for
> this, is that the ISO/ITU-T X.500 group are meeting NEXT week, and I
> would like their comments before the text is included in a last call.
> I think it would be premature to issue a last call on text that I
> have written and that no-one else from the X.500 group has reviewed.
>
> If however, you are willing to wait another week or so, in order to
> get feedback from the X.500 group, that I can take on board and make
> the necessary changes (if any), then it would make sense to have the
> DAP work included in the current document, and to issue the last call
> in a fortnight for the combined protocols document.
>
> I leave it up to you to choose
>
> David
>
> > Yoram
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Howes [SMTP:howes@netscape.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 1998 2:56 PM
> > To: Yoram Yaacovi
> > Cc: 'D.W.Chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk';
> > osidirectory@az05.bull.com; ietf-asid@netscape.com; 'ldapext'
> > Subject: Re: Using DAP to support dynamic directories
> >
> > My opinion is that this document has been hanging around
> > on the verge of standardization for too long and needs to go
> > forward without further delay. In fact, I was planning to
> > issue the last call by the end of the week.
> >
> > Now, we can take this as a last-call comment and incorporate
> > the change, or we can defer it to a separate document. It
> > doesn't much matter to me which of those things happens.
> > To take the former approach, we have to agree that the
> > changes are not substantial enough to warrant more discussion
> > and another last call. To take the latter approach, we just
> > need to convince ourselves that it makes sense.
> >
> > Any opinions? -- Tim
>
> ***************************************************
> David Chadwick
> IT Institute, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT
> Tel +44 161 295 5351 Fax +44 161 745 8169
> Mobile +44 370 957 287
> Email D.W.Chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk
> Home Page http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/chadwick.htm
> Understanding X.500 http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/X500.htm
> X.500/LDAP Seminars http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/seminars.htm
> ***************************************************