Re: derefInSearching (was Re: protocol-27 comments #3)

"Jim Sermersheim" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ldapbis
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I moved the suggested text (recursion and looping) to the top part of
the section.
 
Jim

>>> Hallvard B Furuseth <[email protected]> 12/8/04 10:25:08 AM
>>>
Jim Sermersheim writes:
> Lost. After updating with the proposed text, I didn't respond to
your
> suggestions below.
>
> I agree with the first suggestion. All alias dereferencing should
> dereference recursively, and all should employ loop detection.
>
> I don't see text like "The filter is applied to the dereferenced
> object(s).". I'm not sure what you're saying here.

That text is quoted from protocol-27. I'm not comfortable with either
the -27 or -28 text, but I have a hard time coming up with something
better. Except that I liked the 'Aliases...' text from -27 (below).
Except again, the text is getting rather long...

>>>> Hallvard B Furuseth < [email protected] > 12/7/04 2:01:43
PM
>
> This was either lost or ignored - maybe deservedly so. If nobody
> replies, I'll consider the issue dead. (As I note below, it still
> seems to say dereferencing the base object is not recursive, but
OTOH
> I don't expect anyone to misunderstand.)
> (...)
>> I want to mix the old text with your new text, but I'm not sure
how...
>>
>> Suggestions:
>>
>> Move the part about aliasing being recursive directly under
>> derefAliases. Move up 'Servers MUST detect looping...' as well.
>>
>> It was perhaps unfortunate to have 'The filter is applied to the
>> dereferenced object(s).' _before_ saying that a subtree search
>> continues, but OTOH 'Aliases in that subtree are also dereferenced'
>> seems worth keeping.

-- 
Hallvard
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.