Subject: Re: [ldapext] VLV: a particular target entry

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 15:23:14 -0600

Given what David just said in his latest reply, if I were a client, I
would tend to assume that if the contextID is missing, the list _may_
become incosistent. But that neither insures that the list will become
inconsistent, nor that lists produced by servers returning a contextID
will remain consistent (in otherwords, implementations can be as clever
or sloppy as they want to be).

I think it's appropriate for the statement that discusses the intent of
the contextID to warn that servers not returning a contextID may produce
inconsistent results when paging. Is this what you're driving at? 

Jim.

>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]> 10/03/02 03:10PM >>>
At 01:56 PM 2002-10-03, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>The client may or may not run into a stability problem, depending on
the
>server implementation. I believe iPlanet implements VLVs by using a
>pre-canned result set (at least that's one implementation). With that
>model, it can better ensure consistency without using state
>information.

>I don't know how they handle changes to the canned result set, or
>changes to the users access control.

I don't see how they could possibly pre-can dynamic content.
I see how they might pre-can static content.

If no cookie is not returned, should the client assume the
content is static?

Kurt

_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext

---

From: "David Boreham" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:54:08 -0700

Discussion point: what if the complete list were to change between
two VLV requests from a client ? How does a cookie help us to
render something unconfusing to the client ?

If, as I hope, it's clear that this is a hopeless exercise, then
let's think about a continuum of progressively less and less
major change to the list between consecutive requests...

Where on this continuum would we decide that there was
sufficiently little change to make it possible to use cookies
or whatever other protocol devices to ensure that the user
isn't 'confused' by the list change ?