Re: "search scope" for non-search operations (was: Continuation References vs. Referrals)

ok, I see. I had thought you were asking that similar text be applied to
Section 4.5.3. but that root and leaf didn't make sense there.
 
For 4.1.10, I  believe the intent was: "...between the root and a leaf
RDN of the target entry". We're talking about resolving a DN, one RDN at
a time, and possibly getting lots of referrals while doing so. I don't
think it helps much to say this though, so I suggest changing it to:
"... and these kinds of clients MUST be able to handle at least ten
nested referrals while progressing the operation"

and the same thing for 4.5.3: 

Jim

>>> Hallvard B Furuseth <[email protected]> 1/20/05 3:41:29 PM
>>>
Jim Sermersheim writes:
>>>>Hallvard B Furuseth < [email protected] > 12/7/04 12:09:18
PM

>>BTW, "between the root and a leaf entry" is another text in
Referrals
>>which does not fit non-Search operations, but I don't have a good
>>suggestion to fix it - and I don't expect it to be misunderstood
> either.
>
> "within the search scope"? maybe better is "for a Search operation".

No, the counter should also be used when a non-search gets a referal
to
a server which returns another referral and so on. Or with extensions
like Delete Subtree.

BTW, just for reference: The text in question is this sentence from
4.1.10 Referral:

Some
implementations use a counter that is incremented each time referral
handling occurs for an operation, and these kinds of implementations
MUST be able to handle at least ten nested referrals between the root
and a leaf entry.

-- 
Hallvard