Re: The correct behaviour of auxiliary object classes

[Mark Wahl <M.Wahl@INNOSOFT.COM>]

> Is my understanding correct? 

Yes.

The LDAPv3 information and operations model is defined by the following MUST 
statement of RFC 2251 section 3.3.

3.3. Relationship to X.500

   This document defines LDAP in terms of X.500 as an X.500 access
   mechanism.  An LDAP server MUST act in accordance with the
   X.500(1993) series of ITU recommendations when providing the service.
   However, it is not required that an LDAP server make use of any X.500
   protocols in providing this service, e.g. LDAP can be mapped onto any
   other directory system so long as the X.500 data and service model as
   used in LDAP is not violated in the LDAP interface.

> I notice that support for auxiliary classes in Windows 2000
> Active Directory deviates from this behaviour. Auxiliary classes
> are (permanently) associated with specific structural classes in
> the Active Directory schema.

That sounds more like a content rule than an auxiliary class.  Content rules
also provide additional attributes to entries, and they are associated with
structural classes.  Content rules don't show up in the objectClass attribute,
however.

> Do other LDAP server implementors support auxiliary classes differently?

At least three LDAPv3 servers implement auxiliary classes as required by
RFC 2251. 

Mark Wahl, Directory Product Architect
Innosoft International, Inc.