[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: objectclass of a subschemasubentry

Date forwarded: 	Wed, 11 Aug 1999 07:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Date sent:      	Wed, 11 Aug 1999 07:38:13 -0700
To:             	Ella Paton Bassett <egardner@mitre.org>
From:           	"Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org>

> I also noticed that the LDUP specifications rely on an LDAPsubentry
> structural object class.  This seems more usable to me as it
> doesn't require substreeSpecification attribute.  The single valueness of
> subtreeSpecifiation would disallows a subschemaSubentry from being used to
> define rules for multiple namingContexts (which our server currently
> supports).

Just to let you know that the single value restriction is being removed 
in X.500 (2000)

David

***************************************************

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

***************************************************