[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: [ldapext] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-zeilenga-ldap-incr-00.txt

At 05:38 AM 10/21/2004, Neil Dunbar wrote:
>On Wed, 2004-10-20 at 18:08 -0700, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>> This I-D describes an extension we've found to be quite
>> useful in provisioning applications, Modify-Increment.
>> When combined with a read-entry control, one can increment
>> value(s) of an attribute and read-back the values, in one
>> atomic operation.  Pretty simple.
>
>What should a server return if an increment is requested on an attribute
>with a non-discrete domain of values? (eg, increment on a string value).
>
>I suppose Unwilling To Perform would be OK; Constraint Violation
>perhaps. Undefined Type doesn't seem right.

Our implementation returns constraintViolation, which I feel
is the more appropriate result code than unwillingToPerform. 


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