[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: ou=Addressbook vs ou=People ?
>I'm sure the addressbook topic have been beatin to death..
To a smooth paste, yes.
>I just want to get some thoughts about how i should proceed
>with setting up our Corp. Addressbook. I have gotten email
>clients to be able to lookup employee's addresses via outlook
>and netscape (still fumbling with mozilla 1.x). Now, currently
Congrats! I've seen people claim that was impossible! Although it worked
out-a-the-box for me.
>all we have is ou=People, But i have seen references to
>ou=Addressbook. Should i create entries and put them under
>Addressbook also? or is it ok just to leave it the way it is?
>Why is it better for to put it under Addressbook rather than
>keeping it "asis"?
The structure of your Dit is pretty much up to you, there are just some
conventions like ou=People, ou=Groups, etc....
Personally I think ou=Addressbook is dumb. Objects that are people belong
under ou=People, objects that are groups belong under ou=Groups, etc...
objectclass will dither out the separate types, there is no need to
create a zillion ou=s and eventually result in complete confusion about
what objects go (or come from) where. Things like ou=Addressbook
eventually seem to result in duplicated data; has to be both here and
there, etc... Just my two cents.