RE: is LDAP-server-finding ldapext or lsd?

[Ryan Moats <jayhawk@att.com>]

> Ryan Moats wrote:
>
> > This draft replaces draft-moats-ldap-taxonomy-00 as this is now a
> > working group item.
>
> Perhaps someone who was in Oslo (since as far as I can tell there have
> been no ldapext minutes published, and only a one-paragraph version of
> lsd; nudge-nudge) can tell the rest of us about the disposition of the
> finding-ldap-servers topic.  I see that the SRV records topic was on the
> ldapext agenda.
>
> It seems to me that if lsd were a flourishing WG, this topic would be
> squarely in its camp; and that putting it into ldapext likely will take
> some substantial motivation away from actually having a lsd WG.  This may
> not be a bad thing, but it would be nice to know what (if anything) was
> discussed about the relations among this work item and these two
> (one real and one potential) WGs.

My memory is that this topic (taxonomy) has been part of the LDAPEXT charter
since
the beginning, so to remove it means changing the charter.

As to the history, there was an LSD working group (now defunct) that had
server-finding drafts (both client and server).  Those drafts expired
when that WG was closed.

This taxonomy draft traces its ancestry from the clients finding servers
draft I
originally wrote for LSD.

I'm not disagreeing with you.  I'm just stating some of the history and
background.

Ryan