RE: moving access control discussion to LDUP

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 1:22 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Christopher Apple; 'Rob 
> Byrne - Sun Microsystems'; Mark Wahl; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: moving access control discussion to LDUP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When it comes to interoprability, I think that AC has higher 
> priority than Replication because most companies who 
> implement directory replication may end up using the same 
> vendor product.

If that's true, then there is no need for LDUP (i.e., standards based
replication) at all -- the vendor can use any old proprietary
replication protocol, and interoperability from the clients will not be
affected.

This WG _was_ about standards based replication, and not about access
control. (I understand that the charter is open for revision, so it's
fair game now.)

Once there is a replication standard, and some other WG creates a access
control standard, then we'll be able to replicate it. Until then, absent
such a standard, replication would be confined to special cases.
However, ignoring the access control issue will let us make progress on
replication, which what this WG was started to do -- I would suggest we
focus on that.

The problems are factorable, and problems that get factored get solved
quicker.

Paul