Re: [ldapext] URN namespace for ldap/X.509 schema elements?

[Leif Johansson <leifj@it.su.se>]

RL 'Bob' Morgan wrote:
> We confronted this question when considering a convention for 
> representation of X.500/LDAP attributes as SAML Attributes, and decided 
> on using the OID URN namespace.  See section 8.2 of the SAML 2.0 
> Profiles spec,
>
>   http://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml/v2.0/saml-profiles-2.0-os.pdf

Good reference, thanks.

> Choosing to base URNs on anything other than OIDs seems to me to 
> inevitable lead to having to maintain a registry of such names, in 
> parallel with OID registries.  I can't see anyone wanting to do that.  
> Is there some problem with using urn:oid: ?

I guess readability suffers a bit ;-) But seriously I don't understand
the need for a separate registry if only schema elements published in
RFC:s are handled...

Using urn:oid forces clients to be schema-aware which has good and bad
side-effects.

	MVH leifj

_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext