[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LCUP: updating cookie when no entries are to be sent

To: <Kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LCUP: updating cookie when no entries are to be sent
From: "Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 23:20:09 -0600
Cc: <ietf-ldup@xxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-ldup/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-ldup.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-ldup-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Sender: owner-ietf-ldup@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Sorry, yes. This is a subset of the resaons why no entry presently
matches the filter.

The scenario I was thinking of is one where the base existed when a
persistent LCUP session starts, but later is renamed or deleted.

Jim

>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 09/03/02 11:11PM >>>
At 09:45 PM 2002-09-03, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>>What if no entry (presently) matches the filter?
>
>Good point. This was a defect in psearch, and hasn't been resolved
yet
>in LCUP. We assumed that in this case, the operation fails with no
such
>entry.

Yikes... noSuchObject should only be used to indicate that the
baseObject of the search request was not located.

Kurt

Prev by Date: Re: LCUP issue: Need for lcupReloadRequired
Next by Date: Re: LCUP issue: Need for lcupReloadRequired
Previous by thread: Re: LCUP: updating cookie when no entries are to be sent
Next by thread: LCUP issue: trigger mechanism or not?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread