Chaining vs Referrals ??

LIVINGSTON-C <LIVINGSTON-C@smtpgw.nctsw.navy.mil> Fri, 23 February 1996 22:16 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12212; 23 Feb 96 17:16 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12208; 23 Feb 96 17:16 EST
Received: from haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07527; 23 Feb 96 17:16 EST
Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk with local SMTP id <g.15810-0@haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 18:00:40 +0000
Received: from gatekeeper.nctsw.navy.mil by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <g.00678-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 18:00:20 +0000
Received: by gatekeeper.nctsw.navy.mil; id MAA11164; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 12:47:40 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: LIVINGSTON-C <LIVINGSTON-C@smtpgw.nctsw.navy.mil>
Received: from smtpgw.nctsw.navy.mil(138.145.16.4) by gatekeeper.nctsw.navy.mil via smap (g3.0.1) id sma011158; Fri, 23 Feb 96 12:47:35 -0500
Received: from ccMail by smtpgw.nctsw.navy.mil (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 12dfdda0; Fri, 23 Feb 96 12:48:10 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 12:44:48 -0500
Message-ID: <12dfdda0@smtpgw.nctsw.navy.mil>
Subject: Chaining vs Referrals ??
To: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part

If this is not the appropriate list for a wide response please forward

    In a large distributive system of over 500 DSAs supporting strong 
authentication for bind operations between User Agents (~1,000,000 
users) and local DSAs, and between DSA to DSA; is there any technical 
or performance issues that would favor DSA chaining over DSA referrals 
or referral over chaining?  As a practical matter the DUA should 
perform an automatic rebind on referral so that the user does not have 
to be involved with the process.