[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: matched values 05

At 10:58 PM 12/18/00, David Chadwick wrote:


> I don't think that the Section 4 adequately address the problems of the
> interaction with other controls.  I am not convinced that the MVO control
> acts independently of server side sorting.  It seems to me that attribute
> values that are used in the sorting process can be subsequently affected by
> the MVO control.
>

Ok. Please tell me where the ID is deficient in this area and we will
fix it. I have attempted to cover the overlaps in this section, but if I
have missed something please provide a concrete example and we will fix
it.


If you process sort then MVO: You sort entries based on certain attribute values which may be subsequently deleted by the MVO control processing.

If you process MVO the sort: The sorting is always done on the remaining entries.

It appears to me that there is the possibility that the search results will come back in a different order depending on how the MVO and sort controls are processed. Section 4 states: "This control acts independently of other LDAP controls such as server side sorting". To me if the controls were independent, I would get exactly the same data back in exactly the same order. So, I don't think that MVO and the sort control are "independent".

Note that RFC 2891 requires the following processing method for multi-valued attributes: when an entry happens to have multiple values for that attribute and no other controls are present that affect the sorting order, then the server SHOULD use the least value (according to the ORDERING rule for that attribute).

So, I would require the MVO to be processed BEFORE the sort control. Otherwise, the sorted entries may turn out to be no longer sorted.