RE: Requirements Categorisation

[Alan Lloyd <Alan.Lloyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Sukanta Ganguly [SMTP:SGANGULY@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent:	Wednesday, April 22, 1998 1:19 AM
> To:	merrells@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Sanjay.Jain@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc:	ietf-ldup@xxxxxxx
> Subject:	Re: Requirements Categorisation
> 
> Hi,
>     About the Replication agreement, if the architecture does not nail
> down the different possibilities i.e one-way/two-way, full/incremental
> updates and consumer/supplier model, then where would these standard
> approaches be specified. Also, I believe that the architecture should
> clearly spell them out in detail. 
> 
	Perhaps everyone on this list should have a read of X.525 if
they have not done that.
	Its not that big - 30 pages or so . and it would at least set
the framework for what needed - It was put together by a lot of people
that did put consiuderable effort into replication issues.


>     Another, issues which hink is taken rather lightly is the
> transaction implications. We have to consider the use and effect of
> transactioning the replication. Furthermore, the transactions need to
> be incorporated within this spec or somehow closely tied to it. It
> would certainly have a lot to impose on the reliability of the system
> and hence cannot be considered an after thoughts.
> 
	agreed -
	alan
> Thanks
> Sukanta Ganguly
> 
> >>> "John Merrells" <merrells@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 04/16 6:48 PM >>>
> Sanjay Jain wrote:
> 
> > >
> > > B) ----------- Replication Protocol -----------
> > >
> > > 13.2) MUST allow initiator to determine if it is a supplier or
> consumer.
> >
> > Should it be specified in the replication agreement or should it be
> > determined at the replication updates exchange time ?
> 
> I believe that the Replication Agreement should specify this.  But, I
> don'tthink an architecture should have to implement all
> the combinations of:
> one-way/two-way, full/incremental update, and consumer/supplier.
> 
> > > 23) SHOULD support transactions.
> >
> > What does that mean ? Does it mean that either all replication
> updates are
> > applied at the consumer site or none ?
> 
> I asked about this, but haven't received a response.  My
> interpretation is that
> if we support transactions, then we must faithfully repliciate each
> transaction
> as a transaction.
> 
> > Have we covered somewhere the requirement that the relevant meta
> > information e.g. relevant ACLs should also be transfered from the
> supplier
> > to the consumer ?
> 
> There is no mention of access control in the requirements.  I think we
> should
> have a statement in there regarding this.  Part of the Replication
> Session
> initiation should include some handshaking about what access control
> models
> are supported.  An administrator may wish to only allow replciation to
> occur
> with foreign servers which can apply that administrators access
> control policy.
> 
> John
> 
> --
> John Merrells
> Netscape Communications
> Directory Server
> Software Engineer
> 
> http://people.netscape.com/merrells 
> 
>