So lets try to get a list of all the current uses of changelogs
(good or bad), and see if we can identify viable alternatives for them.
If not, then I think we've got a good reason to look at changelog standardization.
I'll start with my original list
> Accountability (Who did what? When?)
> Problem Tracking (Why is my email address X)
> Recovery (Whoops, I didn't really want to rename everyone in
> my directory)
> Client-side caching (Give me all the changes to a subtree)
and add,
Change Monitoring (a new addition to the changelog means something
changed somewhere... it's kind of a caching issue, but a little
different)
Anyone else?
James A Benedict
Advisor, IP Directory Systems Architecture
Preside Policy Services
NORTEL NETWORKS
Ph: (613) 763-3909
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linda Grimaldi [mailto:linda.grimaldi@wcom.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 9:56 AM
> To: Benedict, James [CAR:5N41-M:EXCH]; Kurt D. Zeilenga;
> ggood@netscape.com
> Cc: Natarajan SK; ietf-ldapext@netscape.com; Savitha R;
> ietf-ldup@imc.org
> Subject: RE: Changelog entries draft. Do not seem to find it.
>
>
> Just one note on changelog standardization. I recently wrote
> a program to monitor change logs for audit purposes. It
> worked great on Innosoft- I had to re-write chunks of it for
> Netscape. I was quite pissed off, and cursed both the IETF
> and the LDAP working group for about a week (fortunately, to
> no effect). Mr. Benedict makes a good point about using the
> logs for other purposes. From a developer's perspective, I
> would really appreciate some consistency here.
>
> Linda
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Benedict [SMTP:grunt@nortelnetworks.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 6:32 AM
> To: Kurt D. Zeilenga; ggood@netscape.com
> Cc: Natarajan SK; ietf-ldapext@netscape.com; Savitha R;
> ietf-ldup@imc.org
> Subject: RE: Changelog entries draft. Do not seem to find it.
>
> Changelogs seem to be falling between the cracks (LDAP, LDUP,
> LCUP?). The concept of changelogs is important to
> replication, but it also
> has many other uses.
>
> Accountability (Who did what? When?)
> Problem Tracking (Why is my email address X)
> Recovery (Whoops, I didn't really want to rename everyone in
> my directory)
> Client-side caching (Give me all the changes to a subtree)
>
> If LDUP is going to subsume the role of maintaining changes
> for replication
> purposes, then I think it is important to make sure that
> mechanisms are
> in place to deal with these other uses as well. Otherwise, I think
> changelogs should become part of the LDAP standard, not just
> informational.
>
> It doesn't really matter how the directory server maintains this
> information, but clients need to have a consistent way of
> accessing it.
>
> James A Benedict
> Advisor, IP Directory Systems Architecture
> Preside Policy Services
> NORTEL NETWORKS
> Ph: (613) 763-3909
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kurt D. Zeilenga [mailto:Kurt@OpenLDAP.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 1:30 PM
> > To: ggood@netscape.com
> > Cc: Natarajan SK; ietf-ldapext@netscape.com; Savitha R;
> > ietf-ldup@imc.org
> > Subject: Re: Changelog entries draft. Do not seem to find it.
> >
> >
> > At 10:04 AM 3/1/00 -0800, Gordon Good wrote:
> > >While I'm happy to resurrect the changelog draft and discuss
> > publishing it as a standards-track document (informational,
> > >probably), it's not going to be a part of the LDUP specification.
> >
> > I would support publication of the Changelog draft as an
> > Informational RFC as it would document existing practices.
> > The document would have to be amended, of course, to contain
> > appropriate statements concerning IETF work in this area.
> >
> > Kurt
> >
> << File: ATT00002.htm >>
>