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

Re: "connections" (Was: protocol-22 comments)

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
> I've been thinking a bit more about the different uses of "connections"
> in the document.  It seems that "LDAP connection" is used both to
> refer to the underlying transport connection as well as the LDAP-level
> connection (e.g., the layer in which LDAP messages are exchanged),

Can you give an example of the latter?  I can't find any.

> and that this is causing some confusion in the specification.

The definition "LDAP connection" = "underlying transport protocol
connection" does seem confusing, the name sounds more like the LDAP-
level connection.  As you thought it meant in your response to my
'protocol-22 comments'.  Maybe the term should be dropped in favor of
"connection", which is already defined to mean the same thing.
([Protocol] section 2, [Authmeth] section 2.1.)

BTW, I've just been trying to construct a problem with this by messing
up the terminology: Define another service than LDAP over TCP, one which
has a layer between the transport and the LDAP (or LDAP+TLS/SASL)
protocol.  Then the "connection" and the "transport protocol" in the
drafts will have to refer to that layer, not the actual transport.  Some
language like "misdirecting the connection" in [Authmeth] will then be
wrong, since misdirection will occur at the underlying level.  I can't
think of a worse problem than that at the moment, but I haven't exactly
checked all occurrences of "connections" to see if there is a problem.