I like the removal of the "example" language,
but this also stops any future attribute name from being used. If, for
example, I have an attribute called SSN and I want to use it as a naming
attribute, there is no way for me to get it into the table so that people don't
have to use its OID form in string representations of DNs.
Jim
>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> 11/1/00 9:57:21 AM >>> At 10:25 AM 11/1/00 -0600, Mark Wahl wrote: >"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote: >> >> RFC2253, 2.3 states: >> If the AttributeType is in a published table of attribute types >> associated with LDAP [4 (RFC2252)].... >> >> What "published table" is being referred to? There is no table >> in RFC2252 nor does the sentence appear to refer to the table >> within the section. > >It refers to the table within the section. That seems reasonable. I believe the language should be reworked slightly for clarity. I suggest: If the AttributeType is in the following table of attribute types associated with LDAP [RFC2252], then the type name string from that table is used, otherwise it is encoded as the dotted-decimal encoding of the AttributeType's OBJECT IDENTIFIER. The dotted-decimal notation is described in [RFC2251]. String X.500 AttributeType ------------------------------ ... Comments? |