Assigning OIDs to private schema items

["Graeme Joyce" <openldap-list@jade.co.nz>]

We've got an enterprise number / OID (1.3.6.1.4.1.2553) and now its time to
actually assign numbers to attributetypes and objectclasses. I guess we
should leave room in the numbering scheme for the possibility of also
defining our own attribute syntaxes and matching rules in the future. I'm
wondering if there are any accepted practices for going about this?

"Understanding and Deploying LDAP Directory Services" shows how UMich have
done it:
<prefix>.1 is for attribute types
<prefix>.2 is for attribute syntaxes
<prefix>.3 is for objectclasses

RFC2252 seems to say:
<prefix>.1 is for attribute syntaxes

RFC2307 uses:
<prefix>.1 for attributypes
<prefix>.2 for objectclasses

UMich approach seems reasonable to me. We have added a level to subdivide
our enterprise OID as we use it for other things as well as LDAP. Lets say
LDAP gets sub-branch ".100" - then our LDAP OIDs would be:
1.3.6.1.4.1.2553.100.1.nnn - attribute types
1.3.6.1.4.1.2553.100.2.nnn - attribute syntaxes
1.3.6.1.4.1.2553.100.3.nnn - objectclasses

Any reasons why this is or isn't a good idea? Any suggestions for
improvements? What are others doing?

Does it really matter if we all do something different? I have the feeling
that looking at an OID an knowing whether it refers to an attributetype or
an objectclass could be useful, but based on the above it seems too late for
that to work across multiple schema definitions anyhow.

Thanks
Graeme
www.discoverjade.com