[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: general aliasing
Robert Streich wrote:
> > That raises a good question, should the deref return a candidate that
> > contains a DN that is not within the requested base and fails the
> > original base and scope checks. My original instinct was no, the
> > required base and scope should be adhered to or the client may be
> > confused, but perhaps I am wrong. Anyone else have comments on this?
> X.518(93) Section 126.96.36.199.3 says yes.
fair enough. I will put the change in as time permits.
> But you can have entirely different subtrees in the database. Why would
> they not scope it to one of those? The only thing that makes it a
> single tree is the null node. Under that you could have a set of
> subtrees that are completely disparate.
Well, for a given search you have to specify a base that is a
subordinate of the suffix for the back-end or the back-end cannot be
determined. The suffix is the null node for that back-end, so as long
as a back-end is selected the subtree scope includes everything within
This is another point that will get you into trouble if the alias points
to a base that is superior to the specified search base. The back-end
could switch on you and the current search method is geared to a
Will Ballantyne GEMS Technical Architect