RE: Listing request names

[capple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Christopher W Apple)]

Sorry it took me so long to respond to the latest round of comments
on the documents. I've been at home sick since I got back
from DirConnect2.

Names in the listing service are not names of schema, they are names
of _listings_, _requests_, and _files_containing_schema_specifications.
Concensus as of quite a while ago was not to name individual schema
as a part of the service because there was no single method for naming
directory service schema. If this is unclear in the documents, and I don't
think it is, we should change them. Proposed wording changes would be
appreciated if this concept is not clear.

About Paul's proposal to change the way of referencing schema specification
files in the meta data: as long as there is no requirement that these OIDs
be used as general purpose names for a schema, I have no opinion one
way or the other. If there is such a requirement, I think this is quite
broken, since protocols other than LDAP/X.500 don't make use of this
concept as a protocol element.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Apple                     Business Site: AnyWho Directory Services
Internet Directory Group                       http://www.anywho.com
AT&T Laboratories
capple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+1 908 582 2409                 Tired of slow directories?  Try AnyWho.
------------------------------------------------------------------------