Subject: Last call on 'Named Subordinate References in LDAP Directories'

From: Roland Hedberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:56:56 +0200

Hi !

LDAPEXTers,

The purpose of this message is to initiate the LDAPEXT
working group last call on the "Named Subordinate References in LDAP 
Directories" document.

WHAT DOCUMENT?

The document in last call is:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-zeilenga-ldap-namedref-03.txt

WHAT IS A LAST CALL FOR?

The purpose of the working group last call is to ensure
that the working group has reached consensus on the
document, believes that all the known outstanding issues
have been addressed, and is ready to put the document
forward for proposed standard status.

During the last call, any comments on the documents are
collected and discussed on the mailing list.

HOW LONG DOES IT LAST?

The last call starts today and will last approximately two
weeks. It will end on May 7th 2001

WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP?

After the last call completes, there are three possible
outcomes:

1) No changes are required and we request our ADs to put
   forward the documents to the IESG for informational
   status.

2) Minor changes agreed to on the list are required, and
   the documents are revised. We then ask our ADs to put
   forward the revised documents to the IESG for
   informational status.

3) Major issues are raised and no consensus is reached on
   the list. In this case, we slink back and discuss
   things until consensus is reached, at which time another
   working group last call will be issued.

Assuming we achieve outcome 1) or 2), and that the ADs
agree with our assessment, the next stop for the documents
is with the IESG. The IESG reads them and may approve the
documents (with or without changes), or send the documents
back to the working group to have major issues addressed.

If the first outcome happens, the documents are put forward
for a two-week last call to the entire IETF, and after
successful completion the documents are published as RFCs
with proposed standard status.

If the second outcome happens, we go back and address
the issues, putting the documents forward again when we
believe they're ready.

WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?

You should read the documents, making sure that 1) there
are no problems or deficiencies or outstanding issues that
need to be resolved; and 2) that there are no typos,
formatting problems, grammatical errors, etc.

Any substantive problems you find, you should send to the
list. Any minor problems (typos, etc.) you may send to the
list or just to the authors. If, for some reason, you have
comments you don't want to send to the entire list, you may
send them to me or my co-chair Mark Wahl.

Silence means consent.

Read, enjoy, and send your comments in!

regards,
Roland Hedberg and Mark Wahl

---

From: David Chadwick <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 14:11:01 +0100

Kurt

I have spotted a small typo in the ID. In the example in section 6 it
says:

server A may contain a referral object
named "OU=sub,DC=example,DC=net" which contains a ref attribute with
value of "ldap://B/DC=sub,DC=example,DC=net".

      dn: DC=sub,DC=example,DC=net

Either the dn should be OU=sub,DC=example,DC=net, or the object should
be DC=sub,DC=example,DC=net

David

*****************************************************************

David Chadwick, BSc PhD
Post: IS Institute, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT
Tel: +44 161 295 5351  Fax +44 161 745 8169
*NEW* Mobile: +44 77 96 44 7184 *NEW*
Email: [email-masked]
Home Page:  http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/chadwick.htm
Research Projects: http://sec.isi.salford.ac.uk
Understanding X.500:  http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/X500.htm
X.500/LDAP Seminars: http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/seminars.htm
Entrust key validation string: MLJ9-DU5T-HV8J
PGP Key ID is 0xBC238DE5

*****************************************************************

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 11:02:04 -0700

At 06:11 AM 4/29/01, David Chadwick wrote:
>I have spotted a small typo in the ID.

Noted, thanks.