Subject: draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-01 comments

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 22:28:13 +0100

Section 3.2 (Protocol Mechanisms) refers to supportedFeatures in the
[Features] document.  What is that?  There is no [Features] in the
References sections.

Section 3.6 (LDAP Result Codes) says:

   LDAP result messages carry an resultCode enumerated value to indicate
   the outcome of the operation [Protocol].  Each result code consists
   of a keyword and a non-negative integer.

Which keywords are these?  The ASN.1 names of result codes in
[Protocol]?

Typos in section 3.3 (Object Identifier Descriptors):

   A values ending with a hyphen ("-") reserve all descriptors which
     ^^^^^^                            ^^^^^^^
should be "A value ... reserves".

Section 3.7 (LDAP Authentication Method) ends with:

  SASL is an extensible LDAP
  authentication method.

I think you should strike "LDAP" here.  SASL is general, it's not just
an LDAP thing.

Section 3.8 (Directory Systems Names) says:

   The IANA-maintained "Directory Systems Names" registry [IANADSN] of
   valid keywords for well known attributes used in the LDAPv2 string
   representation of a distinguished name [RFC1779], now Historic
   [RFC3494].

Please insert a verb in this paragraph.  (Or is "used" the verb?  I
couldn't parse it that way.)

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 17:10:21 -0800

>[Features] document.  What is that?  There is no [Features] in the

supportedFeatures [Features] is a LDAP feature discovery mechanism
recently approved by the IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard.
  [Features] Zeilenga, K., "Feature Discovery in LDAP",
    draft-zeilenga-ldap-features-xx.txt, a work in progress

The specification, as discussed in BCP 64, extends the LDAP
Protocol Mechanisms registry.  I've incorporated these registry
extensions into the revised BCP.

>Which keywords are these?  The ASN.1 names of result codes in

The keyword is a short name used in specifications (including
the ASN.1) and elsewhere to refer to the non-negative integer.

>   A values ending with a hyphen ("-") reserve all descriptors which

okay.

>I think you should strike "LDAP" here.  SASL is general, it's not just

I'll s/LDAP authentication method/authentication framework/

>couldn't parse it that way.)

I'll s/used/was used/

---

From: "Howard Chu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 18:56:24 -0800

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Kurt D. Zeilenga

> >couldn't parse it that way.)

Better would be to replace ", now Historic" with "is now Historic" ...
Grammatically speaking, anyway.

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support

---

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:00:05 +0100

>     draft-zeilenga-ldap-features-xx.txt, a work in progress

Sounds like it should be included in [Roadmap] or included in [Models]
and the registration moved to the bcp64 document, then.  I think this is
currently the only document which the LDAP TS depends on which is purely
LDAP, yet is not part of the LDAP TS.  That doesn't seem very useful.

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 12:57:05 -0800

>LDAP, yet is not part of the LDAP TS.  That doesn't seem very useful.

While this update of BCP 64 will be progressed at the same
time as the revised LDAP TS, the scope of the update is not
limited by the revised LDAP TS (just as the scope of the
current BCP 64 was not limited to current LDAP TS [RFC3377).
Note that it is [ldapbis-bcp64] which depends on [Features],
not the LDAP TS [Roadmap].

Hence, I believe that [ldapbis-bcp64] discussion of
'supportedFeatures' [Features] is not a sufficient reason
to roll [Features] into the LDAP TS [Roadmap].

Kurt

---

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:44:45 +0100

> the ASN.1) and elsewhere to refer to the non-negative integer.

Can ASN.1 names contain hyphens?  (The section reserves keywords
starting with "e-" and "x-".)

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:30:13 +0100

> to roll [Features] into the LDAP TS [Roadmap].

OK.

-- 
Hallvard