Subject: Re: controlling visability of subentries

From: "Ed Reed" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:50:14 -0600

Okay - there seems to be concensus on the matter...

Now - should I specify a new control, or use one someone else already
has defined?  Suggestions appreciated.

Regards,
Ed

>>> Zachary Amsden <[email-masked]> 8/1/00 7:57:33 PM >>>
Yes, a control is definitely needed.  I wasn't looking
forwards to parsing arbitrary filters correctly.  Also, since
ldapSubEntries aren't actually in our object databases, but
are metadata, using a control is a much easier way to figure
this out.

>I also agree that it is probably better to define a control
for this. 
>Can we do so soon?
>
>FYI, our implementation of draft-ietf-ldup-subentry-03.txt
today checks
>each equalityMatch filter component for
objectclass=ldapSubEntry and
>considers returning subentries if it finds one anywhere.  So
all of
>these filters may result in ldapSubEntries being returned:
>
>(objectclass=ldapSubEntry)
>(!(objectclass=ldapSubEntry))
>(&(objectclass=ldapSubentry)(cn=foo))
>(|(objectclass=ldapSubEntry)(objectclass=myReplicaSubEntry))
>
>If we stick with the filter approach, we should at least add
some
>examples to the document.

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 16:27:43 -0700

>has defined?  Suggestions appreciated.

I would suggest the control have a syntax similar to
ManageDsaIT control defined by draft-ietf-ldapext-refer-00.txt
(or draft-zeilenga-ldap-nameref-00.txt) but with semantics of
the X.511 ServiceControls "subentries" option [X.511(97) 5.7f].

Kurt

---

From: Zachary Amsden <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:36:49 -0700

>the X.511 ServiceControls "subentries" option [X.511(97)
5.7f].

How about 

Control ::= SEQUENCE {
   controlType = 2.16.840.1.113719.2.142.7.TBD
   criticality = TRUE
   controlValue = (not present)
}

I think it should be critical, since if the server doesn't
recognize it, there is no way the request can be processed
sucessfully.

Zach