RE: Search over referrals (Re: LAST CALL: draft-ietf-ldapext-ref erral-00.txt)

[Alan Lloyd <Alan.Lloyd@OpenDirectory.com.au>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Tim Howes [SMTP:howes@netscape.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, April 08, 1998 3:16 AM
> To:	Alan Lloyd
> Cc:	Harald Tveit Alvestrand; ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
> Subject:	Re: Search over referrals (Re: LAST CALL:
> draft-ietf-ldapext-ref		erral-00.txt)
> 
> Alan Lloyd wrote:
> 
> > > The FIND IETF working group has done some work on this
> > > problem. In particular, they've developed a protocol to be used
> > > in passing this indexing information among servers. Check out
> > > draft-ietf-find-* for more information.                  -- Tim
> > >
> >         We would rather go for deployability - the more protocols
> > supporting the distributed directory service the worse it will get.
> Ours
> > seems to work and scale so it aint broke - so we dont need to fix it
>:-)
> 
> Yes, I agree about fewer protocols being better.
> That's one reason I favor LDAP + CIP over
> LDAP + DAP + DSP + DISP + DOP.
> 
> 
	Yes but favoring these means you get a limited system thats full
of system and information vaguaries.
	Using the others you get a directory service that has
controlable system access, server to server replication, distribution
and chaining and the ability to have domain based access controls +
binary data facilities (certs and images), component maching, correct
use of labels and contexts, efficient protocols, efficient multi server
navigation, AND lots lots more - with less code.

	It all depends what you want to build - and why.

	(sorry I could not resist either) Alan


> (sorry, could not resist ;-)                  -- Tim