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

Re: New schema

At 10:15 AM 4/27/99 +0200, Julio Sánchez Fernández wrote:
>> How about we add them to servers/slapd/schema?
>Done.

Hopefully many prying eyes will help find any typos.  Also,
I am sure Julio would welcome help entering in additional
well-defined, commonly-used schema items.  Please coordinate
with Julio.

>> I'm am not sure how best to organize the information in files.
>> I do think we should separate items by source.  Hence, I think
>> we should have a separate file per source:

I think we need some organization of the schema items that facilates
local specification of schema.  I think there are certain items
that are required by either standard or implementation (such as
for cn=config/cn=monitor).  Collectively these could be considered
"core" items.

	# core.schema
	include openldap-core.schema # required implementation specific items
	include standard.schema # schema items required by standard

I think all schema items described (or referenced) in RFC2251-6,
RFC2247 and RFC2377.

(Yes, I now rfc-2247 is informational... maybe standard.schema is
a bad choice... maybe ldap-core.schema would be better.)

Past this, other schema files would be optional, including:
	inetOrgPerson.schema		(latest draft)
	pilot.schema			(rfc1274)
	nis.schema			(rfc2307)
	...

Comments?

>For the time being, I have commited standard.schema, pilot.schema
>and misc.schema.  Umich and nadf/fips things are on hold.

I think we should deprecate these items as being either
	1) not well defined,
	2) not commonly used, or
	3) both.

Kurt