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

Re: ;binary again

At 07:17 AM 4/22/2005, Sassa wrote:
>RFC2252 does require: All servers MUST implement this form for both generating attribute values in search responses, and parsing attribute values in add, compare and modify requests, if the attribute type is recognized and the attribute syntax name is that of Binary.

'this form' here doesn't refer to the form of attribute description
(e.g., foo v. foo;binary) but the form of the value encoding of an
attribute of the binary syntax.

>>>Now, this is clearly very annoying that LDAP v2 allowed use of ";binary", 
>>Attribute description options such as ;binary are new to LDAPv3
>>and clearly invalid in LDAPv2.
>maybe I forgot :-) I clearly remember that suddenly we had to switch to using ";binary", now we have to switch back again.

At one time, slapd(8) did require ;binary for values of the
binary syntax.  We fixed that.