Re: All entries belong to the top object class?

[dE <de.techno@gmail.com>]

On 04/27/15 06:10, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> > On Apr 26, 2015, at 12:45 PM, Mattes <rm@mh-freiburg.de> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am Sonntag, 26. April 2015 20:07 CEST, Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> schrieb:
> >
> >
> > > Also I don't understand what the term "significance of subordinate classes"
> > > means to you in this context.
> > Yes. Might it be possible that dE (miss)reads 'SUB' as 'subprdinate' when it actually
> > means 'subclass'?  When talking about LDAP the term 'subordinate'  does have a well
> > defined meaning (that is irrelevant to this discussion).
> >
> > > > The possible attributes that any object can have is defined in the TOP object
> > > > class;
> > > No!
> > >
> > > > regardless of what object class the entry belongs to, any attribute
> > > > listed in the TOP object class can be added to it.
> > Hmm - but while this might be true it's a tautology. Given:
> >
> > objectclass ( 2.5.6.0 NAME 'top' ABSTRACT
> >     MUST objectClass )
> >
> > What attributes of 'TOP' are you talking about?  ;-
> objectClass, clearly.

No. Everything else.

> > > You should really read RFC 4512 more carefully and look at existing subschema.
> > > I give up now to explain.
> > May I humbly reading  suggest http://www.zytrax.com/books/ldap/ch3/
> Zytrax should be avoided. Besides engaging in blatant illegal plagiarism, they often have completely erroneous information.
>
> --Quanah
>
>
> >