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

Re: Considering Attribute Subtypes during ACL evaluation

To: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Subject: Re: Considering Attribute Subtypes during ACL evaluation
From: sanjay jain <sanjay.jain@software.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 15:00:27 -0700
Cc: Prasanta Behera <prasanta@netscape.com>, hahnt@us.ibm.com, ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
Organization: Software.Com
References: <OFF3ACCCB0.AE759A44-ON8525696A.0039BB6B@pok.ibm.com> <5.0.0.25.0.20000930114328.00a66910@router.boolean.net>

"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:

[snip]

> However, given that subtyping is optional in LDAPv3,

Kurt
   Could you please point to the text in RFC 2251 (or
   any other LDAP RFC) which explicitly states that
   subtyping is optional in LDAPv3.  I just want to confirm.

thanks
sanjay

> one
> could argue it's best to leave subtyping within ACLs as
> being optional.
>
> Kurt

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Considering Attribute Subtypes during ACL evaluation
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>

Prev by Date: RE: Considering Attribute Subtypes during ACL evaluation
Next by Date: a question regarding qdstring defn in RFC 2252
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread