|
I'm worried that using SearchRequest.attributes to specify transfer encodings is going to cause problems.
The draft uses an attribute description option to allow one to request a search return attribute to be encoded in a particular way (<attr>;transfer-<xferopt>). It goes further to allow "all user attrs transferred as..." (*;transfer-<xferopt>). Other specification s have proposed and are proposing other tricks with attribute description options (+ specifies "all operational attrs"), (+country specifies "all user attributes allowed by the country object class").
The problem is that we have a single mechanism (attribute description option) to specify disparate features. The way in which these disparate features work together (I fear) will be overlooked and under specified. For example, as soon as one sees that *;transfer-ber is available, they want to use +;transfer-ber, or +country;transfer-ber.
We can either address this by adding some more statements to the extensions considerations document, or just stop using attribute description options and start using controls.
Jim |