Hi !
OK ... we will check that approach.
Do you know if it was something forgotten in the RFC4517 ?... it sounds really odd (to me) that PrintableString (that is a subset of IA5String) and DirectoryString (that is a superset) are allowed syntaxis for "caseIgnoreOrderingMatch" ... but IA5String is not allowed to use it (maybe I am missunderstanding/mixing things ....???)
I do not recall in detail, but this or something related should have already been discussed (I'd let others step in if they know the story in more detail).
Basically, it should be something like the caseIgnore stuff for IA5 was absent in the RFC 225* series, and it was not added to the RFC 451* series because IA5 is essentially obsolete, directoryString should be used instead.
p.
masarati@aero.polimi.it wrote:
OK ... we will check that approach.
Do you know if it was something forgotten in the RFC4517 ?... it sounds really odd (to me) that PrintableString (that is a subset of IA5String) and DirectoryString (that is a superset) are allowed syntaxis for "caseIgnoreOrderingMatch" ... but IA5String is not allowed to use it (maybe I am missunderstanding/mixing things ....???)
I do not recall in detail, but this or something related should have already been discussed (I'd let others step in if they know the story in more detail).
Basically, it should be something like the caseIgnore stuff for IA5 was absent in the RFC 225* series, and it was not added to the RFC 451* series because IA5 is essentially obsolete, directoryString should be used instead.
I vaguely remember that one significant difference between DirectoryString and IA5String that the latter allows a zero-length string to be used as attribute value.
Ciao, Michael.
masarati@aero.polimi.it writes:
Basically, it should be something like the caseIgnore stuff for IA5 was absent in the RFC 225* series, and it was not added to the RFC 451* series because IA5 is essentially obsolete, directoryString should be used instead.
Well now. Extract from RFC 4517, table of contents: 4.2.7. caseIgnoreIA5Match .................................30 4.2.8. caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch .......................31
Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
masarati@aero.polimi.it writes:
Basically, it should be something like the caseIgnore stuff for IA5 was absent in the RFC 225* series, and it was not added to the RFC 451* series because IA5 is essentially obsolete, directoryString should be used instead.
Well now. Extract from RFC 4517, table of contents: 4.2.7. caseIgnoreIA5Match .................................30 4.2.8. caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch .......................31
I saw those. I meant the ordering stuff.
p.
Yes .. it is the "case insensitive ORDERING match" the one not defined (in that RFC) for IA5String syntax ... nor for "case exact" ...
Ciao
-----Original Message----- From: Pierangelo Masarati [mailto:masarati@aero.polimi.it] Sent: viernes, 26 de junio de 2009 15:09 To: Hallvard B Furuseth Cc: Antonio Alonso; openldap-technical@openldap.org Subject: Re: Case Ignore Ordering matching rule for IA5 String sysntax ?
Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
masarati@aero.polimi.it writes:
Basically, it should be something like the caseIgnore stuff for IA5 was absent in the RFC 225* series, and it was not added to the RFC 451* series because IA5 is essentially obsolete, directoryString should be used instead.
Well now. Extract from RFC 4517, table of contents: 4.2.7. caseIgnoreIA5Match
.................................30
4.2.8. caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch.......................31
I saw those. I meant the ordering stuff.
p.
openldap-technical@openldap.org
-
Antonio Alonso -
Hallvard B Furuseth -
masarati＠aero.polimi.it -
Michael Ströder -
Pierangelo Masarati