Re: please publish draft-mmeredith-rootdse-vendor-info-01.txt

[Mark Smith <mcs@netscape.com>]

Mark Meredith wrote:

> I will add your suggestion to section 6  Notes to Client Developers. To read
> something like this.
> 
>  6. Notes to Client Developers
>   
>       The use of vendorName and vendorVersion SHOULD NOT be used to
>       discover features. It is just an informational attribute. If a
>       client relies on a vendorVersion number then that client MUST
>       be coded to work with later versions and not just one version and
>       no other.
>   
>       If the client does not recognize the specific vendorName/vendorVersion as 
>       one it has for its 'bug workaround needed' table, then the client MUST 
>       assume that the server it is talking to is complete and correct. 
>   
>  Does this look ok?

I think this text is an improvement.  But the "Overview" text also
implies that these attributes should be used for discovering some
features:

3. Overview

   The root DSE query is a mechanism used by clients to find out what
   controls, extensions, etc. is available from a given LDAP server. It
   is useful to be able to query an LDAP server to determine the vendor
   of that server and see what version of that vendor's code is
   currently installed. Since vendors can implement X- options for
   attributes, classes, and syntaxes (described in section 4 of
   [RFC2251] and section 4 of [RFC2252] ) that may or may not be
   published, this would allow users or applications to be able to
   determine if these features are available from a given server.

I feel strongly that this document should consistently say that the
vendorName and vendorVersion attribute values must only be used to work
around bugs and shortcomings of a server and for purely informational
(e.g., display) purposes.  If others agree, the overview should be
revised as well.

If there are X- options that are adding real value to subschema values,
let's start a discussion about them (and a document if appropriate).  I
suspect there are, given that several vendors (including
iPlanet/Sun/netscape) are using various X- options today in their
products.

Also, the format for vendorVersion should be more fully specified.  It
is specified as an integer.  But what if I need to publish version
4.11?  I suggest making the value "version multiplied times 100" or
using a string format.

I also wonder if there should be a vendorProductName attribute as well,
given that some vendors produce more than one product that processes
LDAP requests.  I suppose the vendorName field can be overloaded for
that purpose, e.g.,

    vendorName: OpenLDAP / slapd
    vendorName: OpenLDAP / ldapd
    ...

but a separate attribute might be better.

A minor formatting comment: the draft includes at least two non-ASCII
characters (one in the "Overview" section and one in the "Author's
Addresses" section).  I think both were intended to be apostrophes (').

-- 
Mark Smith
Directory Product Development / iPlanet E-Commerce Solutions
My words are my own, not my employer's.            Got LDAP?