[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Non-numeric OIDs
(I apologize for this vile e-mail format -- not my choice.)
"Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> wrote:
>At 06:26 AM 4/27/2005, Michael.Smith@domino1.cuny.edu wrote:
>>I'm particularly interested in allowing non-numeric OIDs
>>in schema definitions
>I assume you don't mean NAMEs, which are short textual
>strings, but malformed OIDs.
What I am talking about is character
strings that look like "fooBarPerson-oid" appearing in schema
definitions in the place where you would normally expect
to see a dotted-numeric oid. Here's what they look like:
SYNTAX 22.214.171.124.4.1.14126.96.36.199.15 )
This string 'fooBarComPersonRole-oid', as far as
can tell, isn't mapped to a numeric OID in the proper
form anywhere. iPlanet appears to use it tout-court
as the oid. I know, it didn't make sense to me either,
and if there's anybody out there who knows the internals
of iPlanet well enough to set me straight, I'd appreciate
hearing from them. Alternatively, if anybody else has
confronted the problem of importing such definitions into
openLDAP and found a way to do it, that would also
be most interesting to hear about.
>I suggest you ask the schema developer which OIDs
>the alphanumeric names are equivalent to so that
>you can properly replace this name with the OID in
I wish I could ask the "schema developers" anything.
Consultants, you know. Before my time, and now long
gone. For all I know they're in jail now -- and if
they're not, I'm tempted to say, they ought to be.