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

Re: >= (greater or equal) and <= (lower or equal) operators in

Greg Matthews wrote:

On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 15:19, Pierangelo Masarati wrote:

I think the standard is missing it on purpose, because regular usage
doesn't need anything but exact match. Note that uidNumber to uid mapping
only needs to use uidNumber as a key for exact filters. If you want to
use it for a different purpose, you should choose a different
attributeType, or design your own.

I think this is too prescriptive. How do you define regular usage?

replacement of file-based nis

I can
think of a couple of reasons why you might want to search a range of
uidnumbers. I'm sure there are other reasons for wanting to use these
inequality matches for other attributes too.

Administration, IMO, is not regular usage. I agree there might be even more
than a couple of reasons for having more matching rules; for sure, the application
that generates new uidNumbers would not benefit from having an ordering
match, because the only reliable way to have a unique incremental uidNumber
generation in a reliable manner is to store the next available uidNumber in a
"cn=Next uidNumber" entry and atomically increment and get it. Of course,
there might be other applications that could benefit from using the uidNumber;
someone (you?) wrote about having the need to determine if a uidNumber is
within a certain range of "special" uidNmbers. Well, I think this not "regular
usage" (my opinion, of course), and this type of operation can and should done
programmatically without relying on the capabilitiles of the DSA or of the

I agree we've gone far off-topic, anyway :)

Ciao, p.

   SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497