Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ldapext-locate-05.txt

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 12:46 PM 3/9/01 -0500, RL 'Bob' Morgan wrote:
>It is still my impression that this doc will not get thru
>IESG/IETF-Last-Call with the current DN->DNS mapping algorithm.

I confident the document will be approved after a brief
reiteration of past discussions.

>But the way it is does represent the consensus of the ldapext WG,
>so probably the best way to get real discussion is to forward it to IESG.

I concur.

>Tim Polk, one of the PKI-oriented folks who is prepared to make the case
>for changing the mapping algorithm, is willing to come to the ldapext
>meeting to talk about this.  So I suggest we use the slot for this
>discussion.

RFC 2247 defines an domain name / DN equivalency.  It provides
details on the domain -> DN mapping, the DN -> domain is
implicitly provided via the defined equivalency.  

RFC 2247, Section 3: 
   Distinguished names in which there are one or more RDNs, all
   containing only the attribute type DC, can be mapped back into domain
   names. Note that this document does not define a domain name
   equivalence for any other distinguished names.

Hence, locate I-D doesn't define the mapping, RFC 2247 does.
While it could be argued that the specification in RFC 2247 is
not complete, the specification does exist.  The locate I-D
completes specification of the DN to DNS mapping provided by
the RFC 2247 defined equivalence.  (If anything, a clarification
to the I-D as to the actual relationship to RFC 2247 is needed.)

While other DN to domain mappings might be useful, these are
not supported by RFC 2247 and, IMO, should be viewed as beyond the
scope of this particular I-D.

Anyways, I do not object to giving Tim Polk (or others) an
opportunity to voice their views.  I do wish this discussion
would take place (at least in part) on the mailing list so that
we'd have it in the archive for later reference.  I look forward
to what I hope will be a conclusive discussion of this issue.

Kurt