I don't know how much overhead a uuid would be. But something simple like a 1 or 2 digit rolling restart count to preface it could be useful without creating a ton of overhead.

10.1000 10.1001 Restart 11.1000

[cid:image001.png@01D97A74.B5E3F1F0]http://www.aep.com/

BRADLEY T GILL | INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEER STAFF BGILL@AEP.COMmailto:BGILL@AEP.COM | A:8.200.3054 1 RIVERSIDE PLAZA, COLUMBUS, OH 43215

From: Christopher Paul chris.paul@rexconsulting.net Sent: Friday, April 28, 2023 7:32 PM To: openldap-technical@openldap.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] idea for possible RFE: universally unique connection IDs

Hello OpenLDAP-Technical, I would like to seek comments on an idea I have had for a while. Does anyone agree with me that it would be nice if connection IDs were uuids? Because when your slapd restarts, your monitoring system has no good way

Hello OpenLDAP-Technical,

I would like to seek comments on an idea I have had for a while. Does anyone agree with me that it would be nice if connection IDs were uuids? Because when your slapd restarts, your monitoring system has no good way to track one "conn=1000" from another one (or from one server to another), and so forth. Would there be any downsides to this?

Are there any upsides to re-using integers starting at 1000? I can think of one: with incrementing integers, you can tell the order of the connections with them.

Thanks,

Chris Paul | Rex Consulting | https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rexconsulting.net__;!!H3PqUTRkow!8R-...https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rexconsulting.net__;!!H3PqUTRkow!8R-fbzzlExm-PpAQmqmQecEKxawcIKtouhTSMvGRQ3q_iSXbBU93VnHNDz8J9KAA1JNOqTV0-C36cQ2sn9Oxrw$