Re: draft-ietf-ldapext-acl-model-04.txt

[Ellen Stokes <stokes@austin.ibm.com>]

Response embedded below.
Ellen


At 02:13 AM 10/06/1999 -0600, Natarajan SK wrote:
>In the draft section 5.2 says,
>
>
>          5.2  Subschema Attribute for Access Control Mechanism
>
>             A given naming context must provide information about
>             which access control mechanism is in effect for that
>             portion of the namespace.  The following attribute must
>             be in each subschema entry associated with a naming
>             context whose access control mechanism is different from
>             adjacent naming contexts supported by that directory
>             server.
>
>Does this mean that there could be more than one subschema entries
>associated with the naming context. This clashes with the idea that the
>schema should be common across a naming context. 
>
>Or do you mean to say that if the ACIMechanism of a particular naming
>context is different from that of the adjacent naming contexts, then the
>(single) subschema entry of that naming context should have  the
>aCIMechanism attribute ? 
>
>I guess it is the latter.
(EJS)  Yes.

>
>Also the last part of it says 
>
>"whose access control mechanism is different from
>             adjacent naming contexts supported by that directory
>             server."
>What is meant by an adjacent naming context? I didn't find the  term
>anywhere.  I gues you mean to say  the superior which is a naming
>context and to which this naming context belongs. 
(EJS)  Yes.

>
>Natarajan
>
>S.K.Natarajan
>Senior Software Engineer
>Novell Software, Bangalore
>E-mail sknatarajan@novell.com
>Ph. no. 91-80-572-1856/58 Extn. 2213
>Fx 91-80-572-1870
>
>
>>>> Ellen Stokes <stokes@austin.ibm.com> 10/06/99 01:52AM >>>
>ldapext folks, 
>Attached is the revised internet draft for ldap 
>access control (already sent to internet-drafts editor
>to publish). It incorporates all the changes 
>identified/presented at the July IETF. Comments 
>to the list (or me personally if you prefer).
>
>Mark Wahl/Tim Howes, 
>Because this spec has settled down much over the last 
>year, I'd like to see if we can make this one a copy 
>that can go to workgroup last call real shortly.
>Ellen
>