HI!
Looking at section 4.1.7.2. "Name Forms" in
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4512.txt it's not really clear to me whether
more than one name form may be associated with the same structural
object class. I think it's possible (and I've implemented it that way in
web2ldap) but the server I'm currently testing with disallows it.
Ciao, Michael.
Anyone interest in proposing some LDAP interop testing?
-- Kurt
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Lisa Dusseault <ldusseault(a)commerce.net>
> Date: January 9, 2008 5:13:17 PM PST
> To: Apps Discuss <discuss(a)apps.ietf.org>
> Cc: Lisa Dusseault's Chairs <lisa-dusseault-chairs(a)tools.ietf.org>, chris-newman-chairs(a)tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Call for interop proposals
> List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols
> <discuss.apps.ietf.org>
>
>
> At the Apps area open meeting in Vancouver, Chris & I mentioned the
> possibility of doing a day of interoperability events at the next
> IETF meeting. This would replace a day of Apps area meetings during
> the normal meeting hours and in the normal meeting location.
> Ideally it would allow people to come to the IETF for more than just
> "their" meeting (although we have always hoped they can attend other
> WG meetings as well) and participants may get more benefit and
> better justification for attending.
>
> If we're going to do this, we need proposals: what topic ( IDs,
> RFCs, suites or functionality) will be tested. I don't think
> interops will need a lot of management but volunteer coordinators
> would be ideal. Proposals will need to be followed quickly by some
> indications of who will participate. WG scheduling is already open
> and we need to tell the Secretariat immediately if they need to
> reserve a day for interops.
>
> Proposals should probably be posted on some relevant subject mailing
> list to quickly generate discussion among potential participants --
> not everybody reads Apps Discuss.
>
> Thanks,
> Lisa
>
>