RE: WG last call on "duplicate entries"

[Dave Watts <DJW@dataconnection.com>]

Jim,

I have a minor query about draft-ietf-ldapext-ldapv3-dupent-06.txt.

Section 4.1.1 contains the following paragraph.

   <snip>

   While processing a search request, a server implementation examines
   this list.  If a specified attribute or attribute subtype exists in
   an entry to be returned by search, and that attribute holds multiple
   values, the server treats the entry as if it were multiple,
   duplicate entries -- the specified attributes each holding a single,
   unique value from the original set of values of that attribute.

   <snip>


When you talk about attribute subtypes, are you thinking of:
- subtyping via attribute options (eg 'cn;lang-en' is a subtype of 'cn')
- subtyping via attribute hierarchy (eg 'cn' is a subtype of 'name')
- both?

I'd guess you didn't intend subtyping via attribute hierarchy, because
you want to align with RFC RFC2891 (server-side-sorting) as far as possible.
Although RFC2891 doesn't explicitly discuss subtyping, I don't think it
intends subtyping via attribute hierarchy (and so is aligned with X.511).

Either way, I suggest you add a small clarification to the above paragraph.

Cheers,

David





-----Original Message-----
From: Roland Hedberg [mailto:roland@catalogix.se]
Sent: 23 March 2001 15:57
To: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
Subject: WG last call on "duplicate entries"


Hi !

The IETF50 meeting is sort of over, at least concerning LDAP. So I thought
I should start issueing the last calls that are in the pipe.

I will not issue all of them at once, to not tax your limited time available

for document review too much.

LDAPEXTers,

The purpose of this message is to initiate the LDAPEXT
working group last call on the "LDAP Control for a Duplicate Entry 
Representation of Search Results" document.

WHAT DOCUMENT?

The document in last call is:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ldapext-ldapv3-dupent-06.txt

WHAT IS A LAST CALL FOR?

The purpose of the working group last call is to ensure
that the working group has reached consensus on the
document, believes that all the known outstanding issues
have been addressed, and is ready to put the document
forward for proposed standard status.

During the last call, any comments on the documents are
collected and discussed on the mailing list.

HOW LONG DOES IT LAST?

The last call starts today and will last approximately two
weeks. It will end on April 6th 2001

WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP?

After the last call completes, there are three possible
outcomes:

1) No changes are required and we request our ADs to put
   forward the documents to the IESG for informational
   status.

2) Minor changes agreed to on the list are required, and
   the documents are revised. We then ask our ADs to put
   forward the revised documents to the IESG for
   informational status.

3) Major issues are raised and no consensus is reached on
   the list. In this case, we slink back and discuss
   things until consensus is reached, at which time another
   working group last call will be issued.

Assuming we achieve outcome 1) or 2), and that the ADs
agree with our assessment, the next stop for the documents
is with the IESG. The IESG reads them and may approve the
documents (with or without changes), or send the documents
back to the working group to have major issues addressed.

If the first outcome happens, the documents are put forward
for a two-week last call to the entire IETF, and after
successful completion the documents are published as RFCs
with proposed standard status.

If the second outcome happens, we go back and address
the issues, putting the documents forward again when we
believe they're ready.

WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?

You should read the documents, making sure that 1) there
are no problems or deficiencies or outstanding issues that
need to be resolved; and 2) that there are no typos,
formatting problems, grammatical errors, etc.

Any substantive problems you find, you should send to the
list. Any minor problems (typos, etc.) you may send to the
list or just to the authors. If, for some reason, you have
comments you don't want to send to the entire list, you may
send them to me or my co-chair Mark Wahl.

Silence means consent.

Read, enjoy, and send your comments in!

regards,
Roland Hedberg and Mark Wahl