Re: draft-ietf-ldapext-ldapv3-vlv-02.txt last call

[dboreham@netscape.com (David Boreham)]

>This scheme seems to include more information than some implementations
need
>(that's not bad, just more).  I'm interested in the definitions of
vlvSearch and vlvIndex.

Right, not currently documented unfortunately.

>I haven't guessed what the vlvuses and numsubordinates attributes represent
yet.

numSubordinates is like hasSubordinates, except it
contains a count of the immediate subordinate entries
rather than a boolean saying whether there are any.

>Using this, is it possible to specify that there's an index which is sorted
by sn, where
>the search is unrestricted (base can be anywhere, search filter can be
anything, any scope, etc)?

No. The scheme reports the precise set of searches
for which indexing is available. Support for a family of
searches would require extended syntax. Not necessarily
hard to design, we just didn't need it for the first cut
at the implementation.

Am I detecting motivation to work on a specification  ? :)