|
I favor #2 for forward compatibility.
There may be future features which either cause the syntax oid to be stored or transmitted as an oid syntax. These features may wish to allow (mainly for consistency with other uses of the oid syntax) these oid values to be transmitted in descr form. Also, a future extension of SyntaxDescription may specify a "NAME" field.
In these cases, a table containing oid/descr associations will allow existing and future syntaxes to be assigned descr's.
Jim
>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> 10/22/04 9:49:04 PM >>> IANA recently asked me whether LDAP syntaxes should be registered and, if so, how. Given our prior decision to provide a listing of certain other OIDs solely for informational purposes (as opposes to ensuring value uniqueness), I think we should. Three options come to mind on how to handling syntax registration: 1) Add a new table specifically for Syntaxes. This table would look basically like Descriptors table, except the syntax name would be some string (like the name of the associated ASN.1 data type) instead of a descriptor. 2) Use the descriptor table to register syntaxes. While that would imply descriptors would be assigned to syntaxes, we'd have to be clear that these descriptors are not used in the protocol. 3) Use the protocol mechanisms table to register syntaxes. I prefer option 1 over 2. I dislike option 3. Comments? Kurt |