RE: Names of Object Identifiers

[Alan Lloyd <Alan.Lloyd@OpenDirectory.com.au>]

I think these issues will come to the fore when massive referral mode
LDAP only systems get deployed
-  where company x uses a private string identifier in the protocol
called eg. "companyperson" with a syntax of x,y,z and company a uses
"companyperson" with a syntax of a,b,c - and company a accesses x'
server and company x accesses a's server for what they think is the same
information.

Boom! a commercial collission of LDAP information islands - Oh well -
and which company will go off line for a week or so just to deal with
it!


AS we ALL know... OIDs used in the protocol (as per DAP)  that are
correctly registered stop this situation this. ie they enable directory
system and information scaling without commercial show stoppers.


just thoughts and regards alan


> ----------
> From: 	Mark Wahl[SMTP:M.Wahl@INNOSOFT.COM]
> Sent: 	Thursday, 18 June 1998 11:44
> To: 	Steve Kille
> Cc: 	ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
> Subject: 	Re: Names of Object Identifiers
> 
> 
> > In general, when an OID is encountered it is not possible to
> determine
> > what sort of thing the OID represents, although you sometimes can.
> 
> 
> OIDs are unique identifiers.  A single OID should not correspond to
> both
> an object class and an attribute.  
> 
> A string description is not unique.  Different parties may unbenownst
> to
> each other register or list schema definitions which use the same
> strings
> for different purposes, as LDAP does not require a single global
> schema 
> listing service.
> 
> Could you provide me with an example in which an OID or string is
> encountered 
> in protocol where there is insufficient context to determine whether
> this
> represents an Attribute, Object Class, Matching Rule, Extension, 
> Control, or something else?  
> 
> Mark Wahl, Directory Product Architect
> Innosoft International Inc. / Critical Angle Inc.
> 
>