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

Re: AW: ldapsearch return strings

At 12:31 PM 5/9/01, Martin Hofbauer wrote:
>Question to the OpenLDAP developers: Why have you decided to do it different to Netscape and Sun's products (RFC ? ,... ) ?

I think the more appropriate question would be why would you
expect an implementation to identify a standard track attribute
type by any other than its standard track name.

I note that I did not purposely implement the feature
differently than any particular vendor, I choose to implement
the protocol as described in the LDAPv3 technical specification.
In regards to this particular feature, I choose not return
standard track attribute type by non-standard track names
as I felt (and continue to feel) that this is most consistent
with the specification and "be liberal in what you accept,
but be strict in what you produce" principle.

I would suspect you'll find implementations that do not
recognize standard track attributes by any other than their
standard track names.

I note that if you want to provide one set of names to one
family of clients and another set of names to another family
of clients, create a read-only replica and than alter that
replica's schema so that the names returned to its clients
will be returned as you desire.