Subject: RE: draft-ldapext-cachedresults-00.txt

From: "Ramsay, Ron" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:34:35 +1000

Hi,

I find it difficult to imagine a purpose for the proxy you describe. If you
are caching a particular subtree, and the requests generally cover the
subtree, presumably a replica of the subtree would be a better option. The
need to keep track of timestamps also argues for a replica: for every query
on the cache there must be a query on the original server to ascertain the
timestamps. I can't see an efficiency here.

When authentication is also taken into account, the difficulties multiply.
Whether the caching model would remain secure in this context, I believe
that it would be quite difficult to prove it secure. Replication assures
that the security infrastructure is in place whereas your apparently ad hoc
method gives me no confidence.

Ron.

-----Original Message-----
From: Natarajan S K [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Saturday, 24 June 2000 1:49
To: [email-masked]
Subject: draft-ldapext-cachedresults-00.txt

Hi, 
      I am attaching a draft on "Caching model for LDAP". Appreciate if you
can review it and get back with possible comments. 

Thanks,
Natarajan

>  <<cache.txt.txt>>