[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Please comment

At 01:36 AM 6/10/00 -0400, Mark Valence wrote:
>
>>One idea I had was to use dn/{base,one,subtree,children,regex} where
>>regex was the default (for compatibility).
>
>OK, this is what I'm planning on.  There will still be "dn", which 
>implies "dn/regex" as you wrote.  In each ACL, should we allow for 
>only one instance of the five possible types, or for one instance of 
>_each_ of the five types?

One DN instance.

>What is an example where you'd want the latter?

Maybe... but I rather avoid the complication for now.

>>Would be nice if this could apply to groups as well.... hmm...
>Not sure what you're getting at...

I was thinking it might be useful to allow alternatives
to group=<regex>, in particular, group/base=dn.

Kurt