Re: LDAP

pays@faugeres.inria.fr Tue, 01 June 1993 19:46 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14781; 1 Jun 93 15:46 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14777; 1 Jun 93 15:46 EDT
Received: from haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22112; 1 Jun 93 15:46 EDT
Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk with local SMTP id <g.10091-0@haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Tue, 1 Jun 1993 20:05:56 +0100
Received: from faugeres.inria.fr by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <g.02782-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Tue, 1 Jun 1993 20:05:50 +0100
X400-Received: by /PRMD=inria/ADMD=atlas/C=fr/; Relayed; 01 Jun 93 21:05:15+0200
Date: 01 Jun 93 21:05:15+0200
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: pays@faugeres.inria.fr
To: tim@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu
Subject: Re: LDAP
cc: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Message-ID: <738961515.3061.0-faugeres.inria.fr*@MHS>

I don't know the current status, but during the working meeting we had here 
with Tim, it was (in my mind) agreed that
   1. indeed READ and LIST can be left out
   2. but, in order to enable next generation client (DUA)
	algorithm it was important that the name error returned
	by an LDAP operation carried back the information about
	the "matched" components of the proposed DN

Tim, 
	do you remember?
	do you plan to include this very important (for us) improvment?


regards,

-- PAP