Yes their extreme details are lacking, but at an introductory level, they explain things very well for newcomers that all the grizzled old timers could not be bothered explaining. I think they should avoid the extreme detail (which can change over time) and stick to general ldap principals. LDAP is a odd beast, if you have not already been doing it for a decade or so.

So they provide some value. But perhaps not to grizzled old timers (present company excluded of course).

Cheers

Brett

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com> wrote:

> On May 22, 2014, at 5:23 AM, Mike Jackson <mj@netauth.com> wrote:
>
>
> Quoting Artur Nike <opalsie@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> Is the suffix dc=example,dc=com in tree is a valid rdn ?
>
> A suffix is an RDN of it's own entry because it sits at the root and is relative to itself. However, if your suffix was dc=com, and you created a subentry called dc=example, then it's a different story. So, it just depends on how you construct your suffix.
>
>
>> and whether the drawing
>> http://www.zytrax.com/books/ldap/ch2/dit-dn-rdn.pngis correct?
>
> All in all, everything I have seen in zytrax is high quality info

Then you must not read their LDAP bits very closely. They are quite often dead wrong in what they have online and the best thing for everyone would be for their site to go offline.

--Quanah

--
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.

- Mark Twain