Subject: [ldapext] Is exclude subtree useful outside of chained operations?

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:13:04 -0600

One of the features of the chained operation is the ability to tell the
receiving DSA not to search a particular subtree (or subtrees). This
helps cut down on the problem of duplicate suearch results (10.9 of
X.518 has a good illustration of where this is useful).

I'm wondering if this ability makes sense outside of the chained
operation (in which case we can use a control both for the chained
operation, other operations). So for example, has the ability been
requested to perform a subtree search, but to exclude one or more
subtrees?

Jim

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

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:41:30 -0700

>requested to perform a subtree search, but to exclude one or more

I think it would be good to allow superior/subordinate DN
matching in search filters.   Given an operational attribute
which holds a copy of the entry's DN, say entryDN, many
of the useful cases can be expressed using component
matching.  I actually having writing an I-D specifying the
entryDN and its uses (including with component matching,
possibly additional rule(s)) on my TO DO list.

Kurt