Subject: LCUP Comment/Question

From: [email-masked] (Richard V Huber)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:18:43 -0400 (EDT)

Two comments on the LCUP draft:

[CANCEL] (draft-zeilenga-ldap-cancel-08.txt) is given as a normative
reference but it is still an Internet Draft.  Since LCUP is intended
for standards track, doesn't this mean LCUP cannot be published as an
RFC until [CANCEL] is an RFC?  So what is the status of [CANCEL]?  I
don't remember a last call on it but I might have missed it.

Should the Applicability section (Section 2) say something about the
expected behavior of LCUP in a replicated environment?  In particular,
when an LCUP client disconnects and then reconnects, which case do we
have:

 1. LCUP is defined to work if it reconnects to ANY server holding a
    replica of the LCUP Context?

 2. LCUP is defined to work only if it connects to the SAME replica
    that it was previously connected to?

 3. this situation is undefined by LCUP and is determined by the
    implementation?

 4. something else?

Rick Huber

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:57:10 -0700

At 07:18 AM 7/1/2003, Richard V Huber wrote:
>RFC until [CANCEL] is an RFC?

Approved documents wait at the RFC-Editor for their normative
references to catch up.

>So what is the status of [CANCEL]?

I am presently considering making a recommendation to advance
this I-D.

>I don't remember a last call on it but I might have missed it.

Stay tuned to <[email-masked]> (for an informal call) and
the IETF announce list (for the formal call).

> 3. this situation is undefined by LCUP and is determined by the

I note that the WG should likely consider LCUP's behavior in
replicated environments where the replication protocol (DISP,
LDUP) allows replication events to be coalesced.

Kurt