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

[Roland Hedberg <roland@catalogix.ac.se>]

> 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.

I guess I should comment on this being co-author of the draft and also
being one of the co-chairs of the LSD2 BOF.

I agree, if LSD2 was a flourishing WG, this draft ought to be in that
group. 

But, knowing also the uncertainty of whether it will be a WG at all
I was not prepared to wait. I think the draft ought to be published now
and since LDAPEXT had it on it's agenda I so no reason for bringing
it out of there.

I'm also sure that if LSD2 becomes a WG, Mark and Tim would be more than
happy to remove the draft from their list of ongoing items if LSD2 would
like to take it on.

-- Roland