Re: [ldapext] VLV: a particular target entry

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

If every entry in the client's current view has vanished, you would just
attempt a re-position based on their current requested offset. They
would end up in a place that may or may not be confusing.

In my mind, for this particular issue, there doesn't need to be any
change to the VLV protocol. Only clarifications and further notes to
implementers.

Jim

>>> "David Boreham" <david_list@boreham.org> 10/03/02 03:54PM >>>
Discussion point: what if the complete list were to change between
two VLV requests from a client ? How does a cookie help us to
render something unconfusing to the client ?

If, as I hope, it's clear that this is a hopeless exercise, then
let's think about a continuum of progressively less and less
major change to the list between consecutive requests...

Where on this continuum would we decide that there was
sufficiently little change to make it possible to use cookies
or whatever other protocol devices to ensure that the user
isn't 'confused' by the list change ?


_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext
_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext