Re: [ldapext] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-sermersheim-ldap-csn-02.txt

[John McMeeking <jmcmeek@us.ibm.com>]

Howard Chu <hyc@highlandsun.com> wrote on 11/04/2005 03:09:56 PM:

> A couple of concerns were raised about using fractional seconds in the
> timestamp portion of the CSN. Mainly, that they do not always increase
> monotonically; some systems will decrement while adjusting the clock
> (e.g. using NTP?). The draft-ietf-ldup-model document specifically
> excluded fractional seconds; I think we need to continue with that
> restriction here.

Is eliminating fractional seconds from the CSN the way to address the
problem of decreasing CSNs?  Would it be more appropriate to require that
any CSN generator generate strictly increasing sequences of CSNs with
respect to the time and timeCount components?  I believe there is a similar
requirement for the DCE UUID time-based variants.

On that note, this document doesn't say much about the use or behavior of
the timeCount field, though some use is implied by the ordering rule.

John  McMeeking


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