Re: (ITS#4868) Binary Attribute Patch(es)

[vargok@yahoo.com]

>----- Original Message ----
>From: Pierangelo Masarati <ando@sys-net.it>
>To: vargok@yahoo.com
>Cc: openldap-its@openldap.org
>Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 4:52:04 PM
>Subject: Re: (ITS#4868) Binary Attribute Patch(es)
>
>
>> These address the use of Binary-valued attributes (#3113, #3386):
>>
>> For example, inetOrgPerson.userCertificate is usually transferred with the
>> ";binary" directive.  ";binary" is not handled by OpenLDAP/Back-SQL.
>
>Well, the solution you propose is not correct, since you are altering
>schema data, which is supposed to be read-only.  In any case, the point is:

Yeah; I think the actual submission found the ";binary" and reset the
reference to it, not actually doing anything to it.

>- if we decide that back-sql should ignore tags, then the solution
>consists in using the canonical name of the underlying AttributeType
>when looking up data;
>
>- however, this would destroy the possibility to use different storages
>for differently encoded data; for example, a column for "cn;lang-en" and
>a column for "cn;lang-jp".  I don't know how many users would prefer one
>solution over another, but in any case either we find a solution that
>preserves both capabilities or we choose one.  I'd vote in favor of
>ignoring ";binary" since it's obsolete and related to transport only,
>but in favor of honoring language tags.

Sounds great to me.  I just want support for ";binary" both on storage and
retrieval to be supported.  I'll accept that it's obsolete -- I'll also put
forth that a lot of things still use it (e.g. Lotus Domino v6).

>> There remains an issue with selecting attributes using, e.g.,
>> "userCertificate;binary" -- nothing is returned.  Someone with a better
>> understanding of the attribute-processing method would be much more effective in
>> terms of finding the correct place to remove the ";binary" from the
>> "attribute-name."  (i.e. "userCertificate;binary" is NOT the attribute-name;
>> "userCertificate" is the attribute-name, ";binary" is a transport directive (see
>> #3113).
>
>In fact, "userCertificate;binary" is the attribute description.  The
>attribute name is in ad_type->sat_cname.

And, in fact, none of what I did appears to have been sufficient.  I'm
still looking at why selecting "userCertificate;binary" as part of an ldapsearch attribute-list doesn't pull the data.  "userCertificate" does.  The issue appears
to be related to the ad_inlist verification on the search-supplied attribute --
"userCertificate;binary" doesn't resolve.
If you know where I can look to figure this out, that would help. I've been
through some areas and not found exactly where just yet.


Thanks for your assistance.
Kevin Vargo




 
____________________________________________________________________________________
The fish are biting. 
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php