[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#5540) Normalization assertion in attr.c
>>> These attributes do not have equality matching rules, but probably
>>> should. I add 'EQUALITY distinguishedNameMatch' to them in
>> No, that breaks the definitions in the RFCs they come from. (See their
>> DESC strings.) I don't know why they lack EQUALITY rules, maybe we just
>> forgot when we defined them, but that's the way it is. Same with
configContext is OpenLDAP-specific. It is also single-valued, so it seemed to
me it did not need an EQ rule.
> Ok, so we should not define nvals for them?
No normalizer, therefore, cannot provide nval...
>> monitorContext, readOnly and the olc* attributes are defined by OpenLDAP
>> (their OIDs start with 22.214.171.124.4.1.4203) and can be modified if we feel
>> like it. Personally I prefer attrs to have the matching rules they can
>> have unless there is a reason not to, but I didn't write these modules
>> so I don't know if there _is_ a reason not to.
For the config attributes, I just assumed no one needs to search on them (so
no filter capability needed) and for single-valued attributes, there's no need
to consider modifies...
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/