RE: Fix for VLV draft.

["Jim Sermersheim" <JIMSE@novell.com>]

>>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> 1/29/01 12:14:46 PM >>>
>At 01:30 PM 1/29/01 -0500, John Liang wrote:
>>So you mean the unsorted entries will be returned but there will
>>be an error code in the LDAP searchResultDone message.
>
>I'm saying that a control TS which overloads the control
>criticality field is flawed and this flaw should be fixed.
>I have not yet made any suggestion on how it should be fixed.

I agree. I don't believe the VLV draft overloads the criticality field. I don't think there is anything in the VLV spec that goes against the directions in 2251. That is, if the control is recognized and appropriate, it will be serviced (unless malformed. If it is not recognized or appropriate, it will either be ignored (false criticality), or the operation will fail (true criticality). 

If there is a problem while servicing the control (regardles of criticality), the operation will fail, and a VLVresponse will accompany the SearchResultDone message. If the problem that originated the failure was due to the processing of the VLV control, the virtualListViewResult is used to convey the problem. This is where the current contention lies with the draft.

Jim