Subject: RE: Persistent Search

From: "Mircea Pana" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:07:25 -0400

Mark,

LCUP does not describe any specific behavior for continuation references.
The document only states that "the server returns a set of
SearchResultEntries that fits the client's specification.". No mention of
SearchResultReferences.

Was this the intent of the authors?

Assuming that for a search operation, the server would normally return
continuation references, what is supposed to happen when the same search
request contains a clientUpdate control that indicates the client's intent
to initiate a synchronization session?

What is supposed to happen when the server acquires knowledge of a
subordinated naming context on a different server, while synchronizing a
client? What should happen in the opposite case: when knowledge of a
subordinates naming context is removed from the server? etc.

Should the ManageDsaIT control be used when the client has interest in the
knowledge information and its evolution? ...quite limiting, this sounds more
like a work-around than a solution.

Thanks,
Mircea.

---

From: [email-masked] (Olga Natkovich)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:14:54 -0700

Hi Mircea,

Thank you for your comments. The lack of the discussion about the
referrals in the LCUP draft was not intentional but an oversight. I will
add a discussion on this to the next revision of the document.

I think that, because the intent of the protocol is for the clients to
contain exactly the same data as the servers, the protocol should act as
though ManageDsaIT control is attached. We can require that clients
attach the ManageDsaIT control to the search operation. Alternatively we
can require that servers treat synchronization requests as though there
is a ManageDsaIT control attached.

Olga

Mircea Pana wrote:

>
>
> Mark,
>
> LCUP does not describe any specific behavior for continuation
> references. The document only states that "the server returns a set of
> SearchResultEntries that fits the client's specification.". No mention
> of SearchResultReferences.
>
> continuation references, what is supposed to happen when the same
> search request contains a clientUpdate control that indicates the
> client's intent to initiate a synchronization session?
>
> subordinated naming context on a different server, while synchronizing
> a client? What should happen in the opposite case: when knowledge of a
> Should the ManageDsaIT control be used when the client has interest in
> the knowledge information and its evolution? ...quite limiting, this
> sounds more like a work-around than a solution.
>
> Thanks,
> Mircea.