Re: [ldapext] VLV: a particular target entry

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

At 04:28 PM 2002-10-03, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>If I understand correctly, your view is that the control ought to
>guarantee continuity when a cookie is being exchanged. If continuity is
>lost, the server returns an error, and the client can re-request with a
>null cookie.
>Is that accurate?

Yes.

>If so, I think this could be done with relatively few
>changes to the draft.

Basically, I think the I-D needs to:
 a) state what "continuity" means,
 b) state that intent of the cookie is to provide state to ensure continuity,
 c) state continuity requirements,
 d) state when a VLV operation with no cookie may
    be processed independently of other VLV operations and, hence,
    no continuity is ensured.

Kurt

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