Re: dITStructureRules/nameForms in subschema subentry for informational purpose

[Kurt Zeilenga <kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

On Sep 12, 2007, at 9:52 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:

> Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
> > On Sep 10, 2007, at 3:13 PM, Michael Ströder wrote:
> >
> > > Discussed this very briefly with Howard at LDAPcon 2007 based on  
> > > an idea
> > > of Steve:
> > >
> > > Support for dITStructureRules and nameForms is still in  
> > > OpenLDAP's TODO.
> > >
> > > In the meanwhile slapd could accept definitions for both in  
> > > slapd.conf
> > > and simply pass them on to a schema-aware LDAP client for  
> > > informational
> > > purpose without enforcing them. Same function like rootDSE <file> in
> > > slapd.conf.
> > >
> > > Opinions?
> >
> > One could implement them in a fashion similar to ditContentRules...
> > (server wide instead of subtree specfication wide).
>
> So you're voting against the approach suggested above?

No.  Above you say "without enforcing them". I suggest "with  
enforcing them",
as ditContentRules are (if instantiated).

-- Kurt