Re: Open issues / questions re: Architecture of LDUP

At 06:34 AM 2002-03-06, Ed Reed wrote:

><eer>
>Maybe it's early in the AM, Kurt, but I'm unsure as to your meaning...
>
>In the LDUP information model, we use subentries in several places...
>
>a) as the definition of the "area of replication" associated with an
>LDUP administration point, 
>b) as the specification of the contents (may be either the same
>set or a subset of the one defined for the "area of replication")
>held by a particular replica on a particular server, and 
>c) as the set (may be either the same or a subset of the one
>defined for the supplier replica) of entries about
>which change information is to flow along a particular replication
>agreement between two (or possibly more, tbd) particular replicas.
>
>Which of those do you mean in your remarks??

Let me try to clarify.

A set of entries can be said to be within scope of a subentry.
This set is determined both by placement of the subentry and
the attributes of the subentry, such as the subtreeSpecification
attribute.  I suggest that it this distinct set of entries which
are to replicated in accordance with other attributes of this
subentry.  The set of entries is all those entries which
form a subtree or subtree refinement.  If the latter, then
the set of entries can be said to be sparse.

If one uses the requirements definition of an area of replication
  "A whole or portion of a Directory Information Tree (DIT) that
   makes up a distinct unit of data to be replicated."

Then it can be said that the area of replication is that
which is defined by the replica subentry and comprises all
entries which are within scope of the subentry.

I haven't had enough coca cola yet to equate this to a, b, or c. :-)

Kurt