[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: (c.harding 30393) Re: Tw bobs worth on TOP, LDAP standards pr ocess and subschemasub entry attribute usage in rootDSE
I hope the conformance testing goes a bit beyond that of the LDAP
client-server actions of log on a read via LDAP a few common attributes.
This issue of corrupt TOP definitions will affect the creation of
entries, what one gets back if one reads all attributes, the definition
of access controls, the configuration approaches of directory management
clients, the definition of filters and entry information selection for
searches, the relationships of attributes within and between entries and
of course the LDAP replicate everything to everywhere requirements
(schema mapping)
What will be interesting is when one LDAP server with a corrupted TOP
refers to another sever with a different corruption of TOP and what the
entry selection will make of it...
There is nothing like an inconsistent user interface and inconsistent
operations management interface caused by baseline corrupted definitions
:-(
regards alan
----------
From: Chris Harding
To: Mark Wahl; d.w.chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk
Cc: 'ietf-ldapext@netscape.com '; directory@opengroup.org
Sent: 7/12/99 6:14:32 PM
Subject: Re: (c.harding 30393) Re: Tw bobs worth on TOP, LDAP standards
process and subschemasub entry attribute usage in rootDSE
Hi -
The Open Group will be working out a conformance program for LDAP.
We currently operate several conformance programs under the name of the
Open Brand. This enables a buyer to require conformance to a profile of
standards. A supplier can not claim conformance unless he has passed a
set of tests AND has made a commitement to maintain his products in
conformance with the standards. There is a legal remedy (under trademark
law) against a vendor that makes a false claim.
The Open Brand does not replace the contract between buyer and vendor
but it makes it much easier to draw up a contract and make it stick.
It has been used in procurements totalling nearly $25bn in value,
mostly for UNIX systems.
The LDAP conformance program will be different from the UNIX one in
many respects. The essential requirement is for interoperability
rather than for conformance to an API. We will be working out the
details of this over the next few months, starting at the Open Group
meeting next week in Montreal.
At 05:20 PM 11/07/99 -0500, Mark Wahl wrote:
>
>My message tried to state that there was nothing the _IETF_ did to
>enforce vendor behavior.
>
>In the IETF there is no contractual arrangement between an implementor
>and a working group. However, in large deployments there may be a
>contractual arrangement between an implementor and a deployer of
>that technology. This contractual arrangement may reference Internet
>standards-track RFCs as criteria for a correct implementation, and the
>deployer may choose to use conformance or interoperability test results
>as the basis for evaluating this criteria. There are standard business
>practices for an implementor and deployer to work out what to do if
this
>criteria is not met.
>
>Mark Wahl, Directory Product Architect
>Innosoft International, Inc.
>
>
>
Regards,
Chris
+++++
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Chris Harding
T H E Development Manager
O P E N Apex Plaza, Forbury Road, Reading RG1 1AX, UK
G R O U P Mailto:c.harding@opengroup.org Ph: +44 118 950 8311 x2262
WWW: http://www.opengroup.org Fx: +44 118 950 0110
OSF/1, Motif, UNIX and the "X" device are registered trademarks in
the US and other countries, and IT DialTone and The Open Group are
trademarks of The Open Group.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-