Re: 2.3.1alpha and ACL set matching

[Pierangelo Masarati <ando@sys-net.it>]

David Hawes wrote:

> I certainly agree that the patch is a workaround--I didn't really 
> consider all
>
> the normalization issues, though I was pretty sure they existed.
>
> I really just wanted to test and make sure sets at least work in 2.3.  They 
> certainly do, but, as you say, some extra care must be taken with the rules.  
> It seems like the ideal would be to match set members with the attribute's 
> MatchingRule using value_match() or something similar (where appropriate), 
> but I'm sure this opens up numerous other issues.
>  
The point is that we don't know the attribute type of literals, and sets 
are intended to match etherogeneous strings as well, as far as they 
resolve to some string representation.  I guess case-insensitive match 
might be a good trade-off, although case-sensitive match might be 
desirable in few cases...

> Out of curiosity, where in the FAQ are these changes noted?  Also, the 
> preferredLanguage example will not work with 2.3 due to the case insensitive 
> match.  
>  
Somewhere in <http://www.openldap.org/faq/data/cache/1133.html>:

   The operator "/" produces the set of all normalized values for the 
given attribute for all objects in the given set; as a     consequence, 
literals must be provided in normalized form.

I concur that most of the examples, which were already in place, won't 
work any more.  I'll fix them.

> Thanks for your reply.  I use sets extensively in my directories and certainly 
> want to see them no longer be labeled "experimental".  I'm definitely 
> watching the other thread...
>  
p.


   SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497