[Ietf-not43] First draft on Relay bags in FIRS

[Eric A. Hall]

on 8/14/2003 11:56 AM Peter Gietz wrote:

> I call this Solution I here:

> This solution would anyway force the client to look into the relay bag, 
> we would need the referral stored there too to have a clear attribution 
> between referral and relay bag.

> Now comes Solution II:
> 
> The alternative, Eric is proposing, is to use the extension mechanism in 
> the LDAP URL, which is specified in RFC 2255 (text in [[ ]] are my 

> You see I am biased and none of the solutions looks very promissing to 
> me. But I think we have to choose between Solution I and II.

Solution II because it (1) solves the immediate problem, (2) allows for
permament storage, and (3) eliminates the mandatory negotiation for
non-referrals.

(1) is obvious in context of this thread

(2) essentailly means that I can store referral URLs with hard-coded
cookies or whatever data format we need. That way, any referrals my server
returns can always bark an identifier, regardless of the client.

(3) if its flagged as critical, the client has to deal with it, so
non-conforming clients will self-destruct. Plus, the client only has to
check if the referral target supports the extension, and doesn't have to
ask in other situations. That eliminates the mandatory negotiation step.

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/