[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Models: Change of structural object class

To: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Models: Change of structural object class
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 09:09:50 -0800
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <HBF.20030210suv5@bombur.uio.no>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030201104350.0292ee78@127.0.0.1> <HBF.20030131ksnu@bombur.uio.no> <5.2.0.9.0.20030201104350.0292ee78@127.0.0.1>

At 08:17 AM 2/10/2003, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>> I don't consider these statements as being redundant.  The first
>> is describing the data model.  The second says servers are
>> responsible for ensuring this part of the model is adhered to.
>
>Aren't servers responsible for ensuring that all of the model is adhered
>to anyway?

Well I think LDAP servers MUST act in accordance with the X.500
model, I don't agree that they are responsible for ensuring all
aspects of the model are adhered to.  At some level, there will
be "garbage in, garbage out" problem.  The solution to that
problem is at the client (which provides the garbage).

Kurt

References:
- Re: Models: Change of structural object class
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: Models: Change of structural object class
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>

Prev by Date: subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)
Next by Date: Re: Models: Schema references to undefined entities
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread