Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...)
Colin Robbins <c.robbins@nexor.co.uk> Thu, 18 November 1993 19:57 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11135;
18 Nov 93 14:57 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11128;
18 Nov 93 14:57 EST
Received: from haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19471;
18 Nov 93 14:57 EST
X400-Received: by mta haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk in /PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/;
Relayed; Thu, 18 Nov 1993 18:14:50 +0000
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 18:14:50 +0000
X400-Originator: osi-ds-request@cs.ucl.ac.uk
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/;
haig.cs.uc.956:18.10.93.18.14.50]
Priority: Non-Urgent
DL-Expansion-History: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk ; Thu, 18 Nov 1993 18:14:50 +0000;
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Colin Robbins <c.robbins@nexor.co.uk>
Message-ID: <"13389 Thu Nov 18 18:13:55 1993"@nexor.co.uk>
To: pays@faugeres.inria.fr
Cc: Woermann@osi.e3x.fr, osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
/S=Consortium/PRMD=ISODE/ADMD=0/C=GB/@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
tim@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu, jpslone@mmc.com
In-Reply-To: "753643734.25032.0-faugeres.inria.fr":
Subject: Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...)
> / > / > A > / \ > / \ > S1 S2 > / \ / \ > / \ > S11 S12 > / | \ | \ > / | \ > > I have an entry A with 2 subordinates (also subtrees) managed by DSA DS0 > I need to have subtree S1 (with S11, S12 ...) managed by a different > DSA DS1 than the one holding A > Same requirement for subtree S2 and DS2 > > If DS0 is a non-QUIPU, DS0 > considers that S1 is mastered by DS1 (S2 by DS2) > and optionaly may hold a slave copy of S1 > If DS1 is a non-QUIPU then no problem > If DS1 is a QUIPU, DS1 believes that the master entry for S1 it holds > is a copy, and that DS0 holds the master. > -> there is no master for this entry S1!!! > > [[ Here come my statement: this QUIPU insists on thinking that > the entry S1 (relative root of this subtree) is held by > another DSA: DS0]] > > Conversely > If DS0 is a QUIPU > DS0 has to pretend to master entry S2 > while it is in fact mastered by DS2 if DS2 is a non-QUIPU > -> we have 2 masters for entry S2!!! > Thanks for this clarification Paul. This is indeed the case I though you were referring to. I will confirm that in my book this is simply a bug in QUIPU, it is not a major architecture problem. I am working on a fix, as you know, I have already given the OFIP an attempted fix, but this did not seem to resolve the problem > is NOT able to interwork properly when chaining is not used > and references are returned. It seems that QUIPU, at best, > implements only part of the reference types proposed by the standard. > (BUT I repeat this is an assumption based on logs and PDU analysis, not > on any knowledge of QUIPU internals and architecture) QUIPU should be able to generate a reference of any type you require. By default subordinate references are used, but NSSRs can be generated if need be, however, QUIPU will not use NSSRs itself, but simply pass them to the requestor in a reference. Cross references can also be generated (and used) if need be. Colin
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Sylvain Langlois
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Tim Howes
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Julian Onions
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Steve Kille
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Christian Huitema
- Rep (4) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Ascan Woermann
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Colin Robbins
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Skip Slone
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays
- Re: Rep (2) : QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Colin Robbins