[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: LDAP subentry, discussion on CN {MUST or MAY}
At 02:48 PM 3/9/00 -0700, Ed Reed wrote:
>1) create an ABSTRACT class, perhaps LDAPsubentryabs or some such, with no attributes defined at all.
>2) create a STRUCTURAL class, derived from LDAPsubentryabs, with MUST {cn} and normal naming rules for most foks to use they way I envision they'll use it (by decorating them with AUXILIARY classes).
That's exactly what I had in mind all a long. But Mark's suggestion
of a single STRUCTURAL class with MAY cn is works as well. I really
don't understand the 'naming rule' issue with MUST vs. MAY.
One additional comment:
We need a STRUCTURAL object class for the Root DSE. This object
class would have no naming attributes... and, in fact, doesn't
need to MAY/MUST any attributes. Ie:
( <oid> NAME 'LDAPentry' SUP 'top' STRUCTURAL )
My question is, does it make sense to define subentry oc's
in terms of LDAPentry? I would guess "no" as a entry and
subentries are quite different. Anyways, food for thought.