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

Re: no such problem

To: Samson Bisaro <Samson.Bisaro@uhp.u-nancy.fr>, openldap <openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org>
Subject: Re: no such problem
From: Marc Jadoul <marcj@globalsign.net>
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 14:39:13 +0200
Organization: BelSign NV/SA
References: <373292B6.9B33DC73@uhp.u-nancy.fr>

> dn: cn= Mickey Mouse,idetu= 1009,o=etudiants.uhp,c=FR
> objectclass: top
> objectclass: person
> objectclass: organizationalPerson
> objectclass: inetOrgPerson
> uid: Mickey Mouse
> cn: Mickey Mouse
> sn: Mouse
> givenname: Mickey
> mail: mickey.mouse.1@poincare.uhp.u-nancy.fr
> l: invites
> ou: invite


I do not think it is a good idea to chose this dn: i would chose simply:
"idetu=1009,o=etudiants.uhp,c=FR".

If you want an object "dn: cn= Mickey Mouse,idetu=
1009,o=etudiants.uhp,c=FR" you any way need the preceding object. That
could explain your problem.

Marc

References:
- no such problem
  - From: Samson Bisaro <Samson.Bisaro@uhp.u-nancy.fr>

Prev by Date: Who can add entries?
Next by Date: Does anybody know how to test LDAP client using public directory services?
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread