Re: [ldapext] DBIS - new IETF drafts

Luke Howard <lukeh@padl.com> Fri, 10 January 2014 00:42 UTC

Return-Path: <lukeh@padl.com>
X-Original-To: ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C60AD1ADA74 for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:42:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.44
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vg5aJq41yp6u for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:42:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us.padl.com (us.padl.com [216.154.215.154]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50C451AC828 for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:42:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by us.padl.com with ESMTP id s0A0gPaP003200; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 19:42:29 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: Luke Howard <lukeh@padl.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJb3uA6mXTXvBtFc1W=_eCYbfEgGJibdwu1zxU4BtiZvCw6-zg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:42:25 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D47330AA-2946-48E5-A410-4D1EE6F95604@padl.com>
References: <1389133522.4574.30.camel@sorbet.thuis.net> <52CD9F94.2090707@stroeder.com> <52CDC249.8050407@proseconsulting.co.uk> <CAJb3uA6mXTXvBtFc1W=_eCYbfEgGJibdwu1zxU4BtiZvCw6-zg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ldapext <ldapext@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-SMTP-Vilter-Version: 1.3.6
X-Spamd-Symbols: AWL,BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE,USER_IN_WHITELIST
X-SMTP-Vilter-Spam-Backend: spamd
X-Spam-Threshold: 5.0
X-Spam-Probability: -20.4
Subject: Re: [ldapext] DBIS - new IETF drafts
X-BeenThere: ldapext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: LDAP Extension Working Group <ldapext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ldapext>, <mailto:ldapext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ldapext/>
List-Post: <mailto:ldapext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ldapext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext>, <mailto:ldapext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 00:42:49 -0000

I was reluctant to join this conversation as I haven't had a chance to look at the drafts, but: to anyone wanting to improve on RFC2307 (or indeed, anything), I would say go for it.

To get traction IMO, it needs to (a) be published in a finished state (unlike 2307bis), and (b) have a reference implementation that supports every platform. Enterprises that are still welded to NIS and need all the corner cases (netgroups, case sensitivity, etc) are also likely to still be using AIX, HP-UX, Solaris 8, etc. (Of course there is always inertia owing to the installed base, but were one to have that attitude about everything, there would be no progress. In the end the market will decide.)

-- Luke