[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: schema-07 comments
I have a few comments to inject here...
At 02:26 PM 6/2/2004, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>>> 2.43 x500UniqueIdentifier
>>> In X.520 [X.520], this attribute type is called
>>> uniqueIdentifier. This is a different attribute type from both the
>>> "uid" and "uniqueIdentifier" attribute types.
>> If you mean an LDAP "uniqueIdentifier" attribute type, that is not
>> defined in this document. Where is it defined?
>> kld: It is in RFC 1274. However, we are trying to avoid references to
>> that RFC.
An informative reference would be okay.
>If "(uniqueIdentifier is specified in RFC 1274.)", was
>> added to the paragraph would that be ok? Would RFC 1274 have to be
>> included as an Informative Reference?
>I have no idea. How about:
> This is a different attribute type from both the "uid" and
> the obsolete "uniqueIdentifier" LDAP attribute types.
> ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^
uniqueIdentifier is not obsolete. RFC 1274 is still a proposed standard.
I suggest adding a statement to the existing text:
The uniqueIdentifier attribute type is defined in [RFC1274].
and an informative reference.
>> The uid attribute type contains computer system login names
>> associated with the object. (Source: RFC 1274,
>> RFC 2798). Each name is one value of this multi-valued attribute.
>Hm. I wouldn't call RFC 2798 (inetOrgPerson) a source for uid, since
>it's years newer than the use of uid in RFC 2253.
RFC 2798 provided an (informative) LDAP description for the uid attribute
type, whereas RFC 1274 provided an X.500 description of the attribute type.
This document supercedes both.
>If you count RFCs newer than uid as sources, isn't [Schema] itself just as good a source?
>As far as I can tell, the source for uid is buried in RFC 2253 which
>says that LDAP 'uid' = X.500 'userid', combined with RFC 1274 for
RFC 2798 specifically provided a previously missing LDAP
description. RFC 2798 can be viewed as updating RFC 1274.