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

[Eric A. Hall]

on 8/15/2003 11:30 AM Peter Gietz wrote:

> Eric: You being the only one preferring the URL solution, can you live
> with this? Or do you see any serious issues?

Using the control data seems fine to me, with one caveat.

> Referrals with a Relay Bag MUST be submitted inside the controlValue 
> field as specified above, without redundantly storing the referrals in 
> the SearchResultReference construct.
> If only referrals with Relay Bag are submitted, the server MUST store a 
> dummy-referral in the SearchResultReference construct. The dummy 
> referral, which MUST be ignored by the client, is:
>     ldap:///
> "

I don't see the value in omitting the referral data in those cases where
the relay bag is also provided. That would introduce additional complexity
for servers (additional logic), mucks with the protocol, and doesn't seem
to provide any real value since we're talking about a protocol extension
that the client has to explicitly support in order to request. Remember
that we have a high probability of changing this as well, and it may be
necessary to switch to a combination of referral data plus control data,
and that will be unnecessarily difficult if servers have changed behavior
to support this draft.

So in summary, I would be happier if the text just said to ignore the
referral data if a relay bag is provided, and did not muck with the rest
of the message contents or protocol.

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