Re: schema and tree design

[Zenon Panoussis <openldaplists@provocation.net>]

On 18-03-2004 14:03, denis.havlik@t-mobile.at wrote:<br>

> 1) What would you use as a tree root for an international organistion? 
>  The organisation I have in mind (T-Mobile) consists of  several 
> companies that operate on local level, and at least one that is trully 
> international. Because of the international part, using "o=T-Mobile, 
> c=AT" (and so on ) doesn't sound right to me. The same goes for 
> "dc=t-mobile,dc=at". At first I thought that I could go with the latter 
> design, and use "dc=t-mobile,dc=com" for the international part, but 
> that's used by the USA. :-(

> I would be happy to go with "internal standard", even a relatively bad 
> one, but it seems that there is no such thing yet...

I have created a number of multi-domain trees so far, and had to face
the same problem. My solution breaks some standards, but works well
if you can live without external referals. I use dc=dot as the top
of the tree (from the DNS notion of . for the root). From there on
I can hang whatever I want underneath and I can choose to keep the
entire tree in one database or on several, on one server or on several.
The result is something like

dc=dot
  dc=com,dc=dot
     dc=t-mobile,dc=com,dc=dot
   dc=de,dc=dot
      dc=dtag,dc=de,dc=dot
      dc=t-mobile,dc=de,dc=dot
      dc=detemobil,dc=de,dc=dot
   dc=at,dc=dot

and so on. Referals within the organisation will work normally and
services like mail servers etc can search the whole tree and serve
different domains seamlessly. The only problem I've ever encountered
with this setup is raised eyebrows from tree structure purists.

Z