Re: cross-schema DIT structure rules

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 03:16 AM 12/11/2002, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>Steven Legg writes:
>>Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>>> if "c=NO" and "st=Oslo,c=NO" have different subschema subentries, and
>>> the schema (DIT structure rules and name forms) at "c=NO" 
>>> allow ST to be
>>> below C but the schema at "st=Oslo,c=NO" does not allow it, 
>>> which rules
>>> apply?
>> 
>> The latter, sort of. In the X.500 model, for "c=NO" and "st=Oslo,c=NO"
>> to have different subschema subentries they would have to be subschema
>> administrative points for separate subschema administrative areas.
>> The structure rule that applies to a subschema administrative point
>> must be one that specifies no superior structure rules.
>
>Then I suggest this addition to [Models] 4.1.6:
>
>  If an object or alias entry's subschemaSubentry attribute differs from
>  that of its parent, any DIT structure rule which applies to it must
>  not have a 'SUP' part.

I think I rather say (paraphrasing from X.501):
  If no SUPerior rules are identified, the DIT structure rule applies
  to an autonomous administrative point (e.g. the root vertex of the 
  subtree controlled by the subschema) [X.501].

>>> For that matter, do structure rules and name forms for an 
>>> entry apply to the whole DN or just the first part?
>> 
>> Just the first part (in LDAP terms).
>
>I'd like that added too, but I can't come up with a brief wording.

I think its already reasonable clear that name forms apply to the
RDN, not to the whole DN.

Kurt