Re: [ldapext] deprecating groupOfUniqueNames

[Andrew Findlay <andrew.findlay@skills-1st.co.uk>]

On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 04:59:06PM -0700, Howard Chu wrote:

> Probably 99% of LDAP applications never even use the UID portion of a 
> nameAndOptionalUID attribute, and the other 1% that use it are broken since 
> the syntax is inherently broken.

That fits with my experience. I have never yet seen the UID part used,
and no designer who has chosen to use groupOfUniqueNames has ever
given me a good reason for having done so. groupOfUniqueNames also
suffers from the 'no empty groups' problem so it is broken twice over.

> I'll happily write up a standards track document to deprecate 
> groupOfUniqueNames and nameAndOptionalUID syntax.

Good plan. I had considered doing that in the groupOfEntries draft but
decided that the extra justification required would divert attention
from the main point of that draft.

Andrew
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                 From Andrew Findlay, Skills 1st Ltd                 |
| Consultant in large-scale systems, networks, and directory services |
|     http://www.skills-1st.co.uk/                +44 1628 782565     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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