RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-armijo-ldap-treedelete-02.txt

["Paul Leach (Exchange)" <paulle@Exchange.Microsoft.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Greenblatt [mailto:bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 1999 7:49 PM

> The question is, do you 
> really think
> that implementing a delete subtree is best implemented as a 
> control?  It
> seems so obvious to me that it isn't the best implementation.

When you said it was just a matter of style, I took that to mean that you
yourself thought that there wasn't much to choose between the two
approaches.

I agree that it could be done either way.

We obviously thought that the control was the best/cleanest/most convenient
implementation, because that's how we implemented it. It seemed to provide
the maximum amount of code sharing between regular delete and tree delete.
 
> If you were
> to have to change the definition from a yet to be 
> standardized control to a
> yet to be standardized extended operation, what do you 
> believe the impact
> would be on your product?

We would have to throw away the existing implementation, for what appears to
be mainly aesthetic improvements.

Paul