[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (c.harding 30612) RE: (c.harding 30479) RE: (c.harding 30393) Re: Tw bobs worth on TOP, LDAP standards process and subsch
Date forwarded: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 23:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
Date sent: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 07:28:21 +0100
To: Alan Lloyd <Alan.Lloyd@opendirectory.com.au>
From: Chris Harding <c.harding@opengroup.org>
Subject: Re: (c.harding 30612) RE: (c.harding 30479) RE: (c.harding
30393) Re: Tw bobs worth on TOP, LDAP standards process and
subschemasub entry attribute usage in rootDSE
Copies to: "'''ietf-ldapext@netscape.com ' ' '" <ietf-ldapext@netscape.com>,
"''directory@opengroup.org ' '" <directory@opengroup.org>,
"''Mark Wahl ' '" <M.Wahl@INNOSOFT.COM>,
"''d.w.chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk ' '" <d.w.chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk>
Forwarded by: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
> Dear Alan,
>
> I agree that the more things you can test, the better. The trouble is that
> it is impossible to test everything, and the more thorough the tests are,
> the more expensive they are to produce. That is why there must be a
> commitment to conform even to those parts of the standards that are not
> tested!
Chris, Alan
Are you aware of the 500plus tests that we created for DSAs as part
of the EC PT20 project. This was a pretty complete test suite, and a
subset of this could be used for LDAP just as well as for DAP. SO
the tests have already been created on paper.
David
>
> >Chris - thanks for that. Its just that testing, which I am always for,
> >sometimes misses the real mark because it is only based on protocols and
> >PICS etc.
> >
> >eg. Our brilliant distributed directory service ( :-) ) can, in each DSA
> >support (theoretically) attribute values of 16k * 128mb, 16k attribute
> >values per attribute, 16k attributes per entry and 4.25 billion entries
> >per DSA and NNNN DSAs can interconnect.
> > And we have seen some "LDAP servers" explode when adding entries with
> >attribute values of over 10 mb.
> >
> >So a real operational test would be read a massive entry from one server
> >and write it to another via LDAP.
> >
> >Other tests like unplugging the power during updates also shows up a few
> >issues.
> >
> >IMHO Operational compatability tests should be included in the test/
> >conformance suite as it is this area that determines a product or just a
> >flimsy-theoretical protocol only implementation.
> >
> >regards alan
> >
> >----------
> >From: Chris Harding
> >To: Alan Lloyd
> >Cc: ''ietf-ldapext@netscape.com ' '; 'directory@opengroup.org '; 'Mark
> >Wahl '; 'd.w.chadwick@iti.salford.ac.uk ' Sent: 7/15/99 4:44:58 AM
> >Subject: Re: (c.harding 30479) RE: (c.harding 30393) Re: Tw bobs worth on
> >TOP, LDAP standards process and subschemasub entry attribute usage in
> >rootDSE
> >
> >Dear Alan,
> >
> >The strength, as well as the technical coverage, of our LDAP
> >certification scheme is something that is still to be discussed.
> >So I can only talk about how previous schemes have worked.
> >
> >The real basis on which previous Open Group conformance schemes have
> >relied is not the test suite but the vendor's commitment to conform to
> >the standards. This is actually much stronger. No test suite in practice
> >ever covers more than a fraction of the possible cases, while the
> >commitment does cover everything. The test suite is extremely valuable in
> >showing that the vendor conforms as regards the cases that it does cover,
> >but it is important that the vendor conforms as regards the other cases
> >too.
> >
> >The real issue is what standards a branded LDAP client or server
> >can inter-operate using. What is covered by the test suite is
> >secondary (but still important).
> >
> >>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.
> >>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >-
> >>-
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >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.
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >-
> >
> >
> >
>
> 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.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
***************************************************
David Chadwick
IS Institute, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT
Tel +44 161 295 5351 Fax +44 161 745 8169
Mobile +44 790 167 0359
*NEW* Email D.W.Chadwick@salford.ac.uk *NEW*
Home Page http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/chadwick.htm
Understanding X.500 http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/X500.htm
X.500/LDAP Seminars http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/seminars.htm
Entrust key validation string MLJ9-DU5T-HV8J
***************************************************