I forgot two case:
15. The client requests attribute desc 'x'. There is no native encoding for the syntax of attribute 'x' and there is no mandated transfer encoding in that syntax definition.
First, I'd like to believe this type of syntax definition would not be allowed. But if it were allowed, I'd think the server would return the values in binary encoding and the associated attribute description would be 'x;binary'. This assumes that there is a valid ASN.1 abstract syntax defined.
But the way RFC 2251 4.1.6 is written, it sounds like there is a need for an extra octet string wrapper.
I would think the clarification would not require an extra octet string wrapper. I don't think this is a problem in protocol-07.
16. The client requests attribute desc 'x;y'. There is no native encoding for the syntax of attribute 'x' and there is no mandated transfer encoding in that syntax definition.
RFC 2251 4.1.6 would seem to only allow the server to respond if y = binary. Otherwise the same as case 15.
I think the clarification would allow 'y' to be anything. I believe this has already been done in protocol-07.
Chris.
> I've copied the use cases from David's original message (and
> renumbered them) and also added a few of my own. I've
> indicated where I think there is agreement.
>
> ---------------
> The server might receive on an Add operation
>
> 1) an attribute whose LDAP syntax OID is known to the server and whose
> native encoding is known e.g telephoneNumber
>
> OK. This one is easy.
>
> 2) an attribute whose LDAP syntax OID is known and whose native
> encoding is not defined e.g. certificates and Steven Legg's multiple
> examples of ACI etc (although it seems a bit odd to allocate an LDAP
> syntax OID and not define what it means)
>
> This one is a problem. If the syntax mandates an encoding, is
> the ";option" required? IMO it isn't. Mandating a transfer
> encoding is virtually the same as defining the native encoding.
>
> 3) an attribute whose syntax OID is not known and is sent to the
> server as ;binary e.g. foobar;binary
>
> I would think the server should produce an error?
>
> 4) an attribute whose syntax OID is not known and is sent to
> the server
> in a native encoding known to the client e.g foobar
>
> I would think this would result in an error.
>
> --------------
>
> I believe these next 4 are in reference to what a client may
> receive from a "*" search:
>
> 5) an attribute whose native encoding it knows, in native encoding e.g
> telephoneNumber
>
> No problem.
>
> 6) an attribute whose native encoding it knows, in ;binary encoding
> e.g. telephoneNumber;binary
>
> This should be invalid. If the native encoding is known, it
> should be used to return the values. Maybe depends on the
> answer to (3)?
>
> 7) an attribute whose native encoding it does not know, in native
> encoding e.g. foobar
>
> I think this is legal. The client should expect this if it
> asks for "*". It should discard/ignore anything it doesn't recognize.
>
> 8) an attribute whose native encoding it does not know, in binary
> encoding e.g. foobar;binary
>
> I suppose this is alot like case (7).
>
> ---------------
>
> These are some I've added that describe a search request for
> a specific attribute:
>
> 9) Request attribute 'x' with a known native encoding
>
> OK. No problem.
>
> 10) Request attribute desc 'x' with no native encoding. The
> syntax definition mandates a specific encoding 'y'.
>
> This one is a problem. I believe the values should be
> returned encoded as 'y' and the attribute description may be
> either 'x;y' or 'x'.
>
> 11) Request attribute with 'x;y' with no defined native
> encoding. The syntax definition mandates a specific encoding 'y'.
>
> This is a bit less of a problem. Same as for (10).
>
> 12) Request attribute with 'x;y' with no defined native
> encoding. The syntax definition mandates a specific encoding 'z'.
>
> This one might be confusing. Since encoding 'z' is mandated,
> encoding 'y' is illegal. An error should be generated ?
>
> 13) Request attribute desc 'x;y'. Native encoding defined and
> encoding 'y' is known.
>
> OK. No problem. 'x;y' is returned and values encoded as 'y'.
>
> 14) Request attribute desc 'x;y'. Native encoding defined but
> encoding 'y' is not known.
>
> The server should treat 'x' as an undefined attribute type.
>
>
> Chris.
>