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

[ldapext] NameAndOptionalUID, uniqueMember, RFC4517, RFC4519



Probably a little late for this... It seems to me that the description of this syntax and attribute are deficient because they make no direct reference to the x500UniqueIdentifier attribute, which is an inherent component of this type. I.e., the syntax definition offers no description of where the unique identifier came from, it's described as if it is just an arbitrary bitstring that came out of the blue. But in fact it is specifically the content of the x500UniqueIdentifier attribute of the named entry.

Likewise, the example for uniqueMember in RFC4519 is deficient. It says "a new battalion with the "same" name would have a unique identifier value added" but this fails to note that the identifier must live somewhere, not just in the uniqueMember attribute itself. That is, it should explicitly say that an x500UniqueIdentifier is added to the target entry, and its value gets used in the uniqueMember attribute value. Overall the example leaves a lot to be desired; an object named by an "ou" attribute is most likely an organizationalUnit, but x500UniqueIdentifier is not a valid attribute of that object class. In fact the only object class in any published RFC that uses x500UniqueIdentifier is inetOrgPerson, in RFC2798.

--
 -- Howard Chu
 Chief Architect, Symas Corp.  http://www.symas.com
 Director, Highland Sun        http://highlandsun.com/hyc
 Chief Architect, OpenLDAP     http://www.openldap.org/project/


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