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

Re: extensibleObjects

Hi Kurt,

Doesn't this defeat the purpose ? Now every configuration parameter (most if
not all are strings) will have to be defined. I wish it worked like
netscape's ldap server.

Tarek Hammoud

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
To: <openldapmail@c158163-a.mntp1.il.home.com>
Cc: <openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: extensibleObjects

> At 07:57 AM 11/4/00 -0800, OpenLDAP Mailing list wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >We are using openldap 2.x and would like to use the extensibleObject
class to store application configuration data.
> extensibleObject allows any user attribute type to be present in
> the entry.  It doesn't allow undefined attribute types to be
> present.
> > The problem we are having, is that openldap insists on the attribute
type being defined in the schema file rather than default the type to cis.
> Yes, OpenLDAP 2.0 treats undefined attribute types as undefined
> attribute types.