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

Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist

To: <Kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist
From: "Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 23:51:37 -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

I don't get it... A synchronizeAndPersist session should return the
complete copy, then drop into the "persist" mode. What am I missing?

Jim

>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 09/03/02 11:50PM >>>
At 10:23 PM 2002-09-03, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>Why is there a suggestion in Section 6 to "perform an initial
>synchronization...(synchronizeOnly)" and then immediately perform a
>synchronizeAndPersist session? Why not just perform a
>synchronizeAndPersist session to begin with?

Because the client has no other way to determine that
it presently has a complete copy of the DIT fragment.

Kurt

Follow-Ups:
- Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist
  - From: Kurt D. Zeilenga

Prev by Date: Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist
Next by Date: Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist
Previous by thread: Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist
Next by thread: Re: LCUP issue: sync, then sync and persist
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread