[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: LDAP extensions for subtrees.

To: rweltman@netscape.com (Rob Weltman), ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
Subject: Re: LDAP extensions for subtrees.
From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@dtasi.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 18:31:16 -0700
In-reply-to: <376D1BD6.4EAE6337@netscape.com>
References: <3.0.6.32.19990620093059.0091d7f0@pop.walltech.com>
Resent-date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 18:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-from: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
Resent-message-id: <"O8tiqC.A.hED.0YZb3"@glacier>
Resent-sender: ietf-ldapext-request@netscape.com

At 09:50 AM 6/20/99 -0700, Rob Weltman wrote:
>  Bruce,   There is some need for subtree operations besides moddn, at
>least subtree deletion, but the draft proposal doesn't handle
>transactionality, locking, and distribution (referrals) - which I believe
>are the hardest things related to subtree operations. Rob 

Yes, but these operations are all atomic, which bypasses the need for
transactional capabilities at the LDAP level...

Bruce

Follow-Ups:
- Re: LDAP extensions for subtrees.
  - From: rweltman@netscape.com (Rob Weltman)

References:
- LDAP extensions for subtrees.
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@dtasi.com>
- Re: LDAP extensions for subtrees.
  - From: rweltman@netscape.com (Rob Weltman)

Prev by Date: Re: C API draft3: ber_tag_t and LBER_ERROR
Next by Date: Re: LDAP extensions for subtrees.
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread