Re: [kmip] Groups - Locate with Offset uploaded

[Susan Gleeson <susan.gleeson@oracle.com>]

On 5/15/2014 4:18 PM, Tim Hudson wrote:

On 16/05/2014 6:05 AM, John Leiseboer wrote:

> If you are suggesting that the order of objects returned from Locate should be made to be required to be deterministic then you should perhaps raise that as a separate proposal.

No. I am not suggesting this at all, as this would not solve the issue. Given the discussion at the last face to face I’m reluctant to raise much at all. I just wanted to point out, and you have confirmed, that the proposed solution is not consistent with the specification, and that it is not robust to implementation differences (or in other words, it relies on server implementations being “sensible”, where sensible does not mean designed in accordance with the specification).

Actually no John - I'm pointing out that the item you are raising in the context of this issue is an item we have as a technical committee previously determined did not need to be set as a requirement. If you want to revisit that issue then you should raise the base issue independent of the proposal that updates a feature.

This proposal is entirely consistent with the specification - it continues to not mandate (or preclude) a specific order.

The specification does not mandate a particular design for a server (that is a non-goal) - it specifies an interoperability protocol - server design is left to the implementers of each server.

Tim.

Maybe I'm being dense (wouldn't be the first time), but one would assume the purpose of the
offset is to allow someone to iterate through the values in chunks, but if there's no guaranteed
order, using locate with an offset doesn't mean you'll ever be able to get the full set of results you may
have been looking for.  Guess without ordering I just don't see the point of this option.

Sue