Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Transactions
RFC 5805

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 15 and is now closed.

Alexey Melnikov Yes

Comment (2009-12-04)
No email
send info
>3.5. Miscellaneous Issues
>
>  Transactions cannot be nested.

Can you clarify what you mean here?
Do you mean that the client can't issue several Transaction Start commands in a row (on a single LDAP association)?

>5. Distributed Directory Considerations
>
>  This mechanism defined by this document does not support client-side
>  chasing.  Transaction identifiers are specific to a particular LDAP
>  association (as established via the LDAP Bind operation).

Just to double check: does this mean that transaction identifiers can't be reused on other LDAP connections and that they don't have to be globally unique?

>10.2. Informative References
>
>  [DONTUSECOPY] Zeilenga, K., "LDAP Don't Use Copy Control", draft-
>                zeilenga-ldap-dontusecopy-xx.txt, a work in progress.

Expired?

(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

Comment (2009-12-16)
No email
send info
What's experimental about this protocol extension and why is it on the independent stream rather than going for PS?

(Adrian Farrel) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Russ Housley) No Objection

Comment (2009-12-17)
No email
send info
  I think the section in the write-up labelled "IESG Note" should be
  labelled "Note to RFC Editor".  The intent is not to put the text
  in that section into the document.

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

Comment (2009-12-17)
No email
send info
I support Adrian's DISCUSS. I believe that this document is very useful and that Experimental is the right status for it, and for these reasons I would like to see the conditions of the experiment and the criteria for success clearly defined.

(Robert Sparks) No Objection

Magnus Westerlund No Objection