[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Attribute Name Length Bounds
Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote, On 06/25/03 12:30:
Larry,
No server is required to support open-ended schema.
What is "open-ended schema"?
Requirements
for such servers supporting open-ended schema don't belong in the
LDAP TS, they belong in an applicability statement for servers
supporting open-ended schema. The "assurance" is then provided
by developers who claim their server adheres to this applicability
statement.
I won't/haven't presume(d) to say whether LDAP TS is the right
document to address this issue or not. It's just an issue right
now, as far as I'm concerned. But it's definitely an issue which
should be addressed by this WG.
At 08:42 AM 6/25/2003, Larry S. Bartz wrote:
"Implementations MUST, at minimum, support object identifier
descriptors (such as attributetype names, objectclass names,
matching rule names, and the like) which are 1024 characters
in length.
Today, servers must be able to handle descriptors of any length
but are not required to otherwise support descriptors of any
length.
What is the difference between "handle" and "support"? How does
that difference impinge upon the potential for one to implement
a schema which contains long names on a server which has a
relatively short name length limit?
Your suggestion would not only require servers to otherwise
support names which they need not, but would imply that a
server need not handle names longer than 1024. The former
is problematic because no server is required to support
open-ended schema and the latter is problematic as servers
need to be able to handle all legal PDUs to avoid protocol
interoperability problems.
Implementations MUST, at minimum, support 'DESC' or
description values which are 1024 characters in length.
Implementations MAY support object identifier descriptors
and/or 'DESC' values which exceed 1024 characters in length."
Likewise.
[sound of light bulb clicking "ON"] Right. Both NAME and DESC
are optional fields of various schema component descriptors.
So by "open-ended schema" do you mean that they are optional
for servers to support as well as optional for implementors
to use? I haven't seen a server which didn't support NAME and
DESC, so it didn't occur to me that some servers might not
implement support for them.
Try this:
"Implementations which support the 'NAME' field of schema
descriptors MUST, at minimum, support values for that field
(such as attributetype names, objectclass names, matching rule
names, and the like) which are 1024 characters in length.
Implementations which support the 'DESC' field of schema descriptors
MUST, at minimum, support values for that field which are 1024
characters in length. Implementations MAY support 'NAME' field values
and/or 'DESC' field values which exceed 1024 characters in length."
--
--
#::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
# Larry Bartz | |
# lbartz@parnelli.indy.cr.irs.gov | Ooo, ooo, |
# | Ooo, ooo, oooooo! |
# | I've got a gnu attitude! |
# voice (317) 226-7060 | |
# FAX (317) 226-6378 | |
#::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|