[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: sn/surname mess. Need your opinion
Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
Note that the formal description [RFC2256] of the SN attribute
( 188.8.131.52 NAME 'sn' SUP name )
> No server is required to recognize this attribute type by any
> name other than 'sn'. A client which asks for 'surname' is
> simply broken and won't interoperate broadly.
So why adding alias 'surname' at all?
Or, to put it another way, slapd(8) is being liberal in accepting
'surname' as an alias for 'sn', but strict in returning the
proper name for the attribute type.
One could argue that according to RFC2256 OpenLDAP is too liberal here. If
you don't add 'surname' as alias it's even more evident that the client is
broken and we wouldn't have this discussion here.