Re: LDAPSubentries comments review and request for last callbyLDAPEXT and LDUP working groups
"Ed Reed" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ldup |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I think I answered that - because the X.500 refinement mechanism is too complex to be easily understood, configured, or implemented, much less managed. A profile of a simpler thing is needed for many applications. ================= Ed Reed Reed-Matthews, Inc. +1 801 796 7065 http://www.Reed-Matthews.COM >>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email protected]> 07/19/01 06:40PM >>> At 08:29 AM 7/19/2001, Ed Reed wrote: >LDAP includes, by reference, X.500 subentries, including refinement Then why are we wasting our time with LDAPsubentries? X.500 subentries provides a sound approach, an approach proven to work for holding subschema, ACIs, and collective attributes. We certainly don't need an second approach, especially one which is inconsistent with the X.500 data model which implementations "MUST act in accordance with." Kurt