[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: caseIgnoreIA5OrderingMatch not supported (ITS#3018)
I do not believe caseIgnoreIA5OrderingMatch has ever been formally
specified. Someone could easily write an I-D detailing this and
a number of other "missing" rules (as I did for the X.520 missing
rules), but I'll leave this (at least for now) to someone else to do.
I generally question the use of IA5 strings in new schema elements.
Generally, Directory String should be used instead.
Anyways, as there exists no specification for this rule and I
see no reason to track a request to implement something which
is unspecified, I'll close this ITS.
At 05:25 AM 3/15/2004, email@example.com wrote:
>> If I understand your anwser correctly, "caseIgnoreIA5OrderingMatch" is
>> NOT in the LDAP standard?
>It is not supported by OpenLDAP's server, as far as I can tell from the
>> Is there an alternative for value for the ORDERING key?
>> Or does ordering not apply for IA5 strings, since they are ASCII?
>It should apply, but I guess it is not defined (somebody forgot to define
>it in some rfc, I suppose)
>> I tried "ORDERING caseIgnoreMatch" but this results in a schema error.
>I know, I tried the same :) do you really have to use IA5 strings? Maybe
>someone else with a more comprehensive understanding of standard track
>could help you. My sensation is that IA5 strings should be replaced by