Re: Subentries: Need for a control to access?

[Mark Smith <mcs@netscape.com>]

"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:
> 
> At 03:03 PM 8/20/99 -0600, Ed Reed wrote:
> >So, I'm proposing that the NOTE be changed to read...
> >
> >"NOTE:  No special treatment of LDAP Subentries by applications
> >or directory services is required.  However, servers which DO provide
> >special handling MUST do so in the following way:
> 
> Is there an overriding reason why this must be a MUST?  I'd
> much prefer a "SHOULD".

I think it would be a good idea to encourage everyone to support special
handling of LDAP Subentries.  I'd like to see the entire "NOTE" replaced
by a SHOULD, e.g.,:

"Servers SHOULD implement the following special handling of LDAPsubentry
entries: ..."

This still leaves room for a particular implementation to not support
the special handling specified in the draft or to do something else
instead if there is a valid reason to do so.

-- 
Mark Smith
iPlanet Directory Architect / Sun-Netscape Alliance
My words are my own, not my employer's.   Got LDAP?