[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: DN "a published table" clarification
Well, I interpret it differently.
RFC2253, 2.3 says,
"If the AttributeType is in a published table of attribute types associated
with LDAP [4], ...".
I take that to mean the table is the entire reference [4], namely RFC2252.
Thus the names for all attributes defined in RFC2252 can be used.
The table in section 2.3 is introduced as,
"As an example, strings for a few of the attribute types frequently seen in
RDNs include:"
The table is clearly identified as an example, not as an exhaustive list of
all allowed attribute names.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kurt D. Zeilenga [mailto:Kurt@OpenLDAP.org]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 5:55 PM
> To: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
> Subject: DN "a published table" clarification
>
>
> I believe that RFC 2253, Section 2.3 was unclear when it
> referred to "a published table". I fully concur with Mark
> Wahl's 11/1/2000 post that the table being referred to is
> the table published within the section. In the revision DN
> I-D, I offer a clarification to this effect. If others
> believe RFC2253 was actually referring to some other table,
> please speak up. The type name string restrictions remains
> as specified in RFC2253, 2.3.
>
> I acknowledge that many, but not all, implementations generate
> DNs which is not allowed by RFC2253 (when using LDAPv3) and/or
> RFC1779 (when using RFC1779). However, unless there is specific
> lack of completeness or clarity or technical weakness of within
> the specification which someone can point out, I cannot offer
> any edit.
>
> Kurt
>