IETF#73 LDAP BOF Proposal
by Kurt Zeilenga
I intend to send a BOF proposal for IETF#73 for the purpose of forming
a new working group to undertake LDAP standards work. Below is a
rough proposal for your consideration and comments. (I am surely
biased as what new engineering efforts the proposed WG ought take on,
please do feel free to offer other possible work items.)
-- Kurt
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) BOF
Chair(s): TBD
The purpose of this BOF is to discuss the formation of a working group
to undertake LDAP standards work. It is conceived that the proposed
WG would undertake both the revision of existing technical
specifications for LDAP extensions and the engineering of new LDAP
extensions.
There are numerous existing technical specifications for LDAP
extensions. Most of the Standard Track specifications were published
prior to the current LDAP "core" specification [RFC 4510] and are in
the need of revision. In some cases, it may be more appropriate to
move the extension off the Standards Track. While the work of
determining which RFC should be revised (or moved off to a different
track), and prioritization of the work, could be deferred to the WG,
it is hoped that the BOF will reach some conclusions as to which
revision work is of the highest priority.
There are also numerous extensions to LDAP which seem worthy of
standardization. It is hoped that the BOF will reach some conclusion
as to short list of new extension work items to be undertaken (at
least initially) by the proposed WG. That short list might include,
for instance, in LDAP Transactions and Extensions for X.500 Alignment.
By including both revision and new engineering work items in a single
working group it is hoped that the sufficient participation levels
will be maintained to make reasonable progress in both revision and
new engineering work.
15 years
Change of name forms and DIT structure rules when renaming an entry
by Michael Ströder
HI!
when displaying an input form for renaming an entry I'd like to let the
user search for possible new superior DNs. If applicable I'd like to
construct the search filter derived from applicable DIT structure rules.
So the question is how to find the structural object classes which are
allowed for superior entries.
X.501 (1993) section 12.6.5 says:
"Each object and alias entry is governed by a single DIT structure rule."
Currently I determine the governing structure rule by looking up the
best matching name form for 1. the structural object class and 2. the
current old RDN. Then I can derive the possible superior structure rules
and lookup the superior structural object classes via the accompanying
name forms.
But now I wonder what to do in case the user wants to change the RDN
together with a new superior DN in one rename operation? From my
understanding changing the RDN could lead to another governing structure
rule. Is that right?
Ciao, Michael.
P.S.: I'd appreciate interop testing over Internet regarding this...
--
Michael Ströder
E-Mail: michael(a)stroeder.com
http://www.stroeder.com
15 years, 1 month
subscribe
by Radha Krishna
****************************************************************************
****************************
This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI,
which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed
above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including,
but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or
dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is
prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by
phone or email immediately and delete it!
15 years, 1 month
