ando@sys-net.it wrote:

michael@stroeder.com wrote:

...

What's the use-case for this? I'm concerned about overloading the semantics of Relax Rules control far beyond what's written in draft-zeilenga-ldap-relax.

Well, a user with "manage" privileges on related data could bypass constraints enforced by slapo-constraint(5) by using the "relax" control.

This is a technical description.

The rationale is that a user with manage privileges could be able to repair an entry that needs to violate a constraint for good reasons.

Currently I can't imagine a use-case for this particular violation of constraints. Do you have one? Just an example?

I decided to overload "relax" rather than defining a specific control because I believe this fits into the spirit of "relax".

I'm not sure. See, I try to support Relax Rules control in web2ldap. If the control is in effect the behaviour of the UI has to be heavily changed. I even considered proposing a that the Relax Rules control should have different values for specifying what particular constraint shall be relaxed.

In fact, the resulting entry would violate a constraint, but would not violate the protocol.

Yes. I'm more concerned about complexity in a UI frontend.

Ciao, Michael.