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

Re: application defined permissions

To: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
Subject: Re: application defined permissions
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:17:53 -0800
Cc: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com, ietf-ldapext@netscape.com
In-reply-to: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220110008.00a8b580@pop.walltech.com>
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220104816.00ac8290@router.boolean.net> <5.0.2.1.0.20010220103216.00a679c8@pop.walltech.com>

At 11:00 AM 2/20/01 -0800, Bruce Greenblatt wrote:
>At 10:54 AM 2/20/2001 -0800, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>>An attribute type can not, should not be both userApplication and
>>operational usages.
>
>Why not?

Because a directory implementation may not implement the operational
usage but your application should still be able to store the user
value.  A server which does not support the operational usage should
not publish the ldapACI attribute in its subschema.

Kurt

Follow-Ups:
- Re: application defined permissions
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>

References:
- Re: application defined permissions
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- application defined permissions
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>
- Re: application defined permissions
  - From: Bruce Greenblatt <bgreenblatt@directory-applications.com>

Prev by Date: Re: application defined permissions
Next by Date: 300 MEMBERS BELOW YOU
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread