[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Q: How can I use a different core.schema with 2.3.x?
Howard Chu wrote:
Mark Swanson wrote:
Have I missed anything? I hope so because if not I will have to move to
another LDAP server.
Given that what you are talking about is an RFC defined SYNTAX for
all LDAP servers, how is moving to a different LDAP server going to help
There are other LDAP servers have the same behaviour as OpenLDAP 2.2.x.
There are other LDAP servers that corrupt their databases just like
back-ldbm in OpenLDAP 2.2.x. Pointing at what software does wrong is not
a compelling reason to make a change.
Most times I would agree. But
Outlook/Notes/Thunderbird/Evolution/KMail/etc.. (and believe it or not,
a good number of cell phones too) have already defined the standard for
telephoneNumber as a String. It seems to me that interoperability with
these systems is pretty hard to ignore.
you? The basic problem here is data entry by the users of those
devices, it sounds like, rather than a problem with the LDAP server.
Of course, user education is one of the hardest things to achieve.
Almost. The problem is that other software allows basic text strings
for attributes like telephoneNumber. I can't blame a user for using it
as a string if the software lets them. Unless Outlook/cell phones,
etc.. force users to use the LDAP syntax users aren't going to do it
on their own. Since Outlook/cell phones/etc.. have not forced this
behaviour in the past telephoneNumbers will never be in the RFC syntax.
Funny, none of my Motorola cell phones allow arbitrary strings in
telephone number fields. Even worse, I can't even enter "+" for
international numbers in some of the older phones. You can't generalize
from your specific experiences and assume that what you want is the best
Given my background you have it in reverse. You are generalizing from
your limited specific experiences with a couple of Motorola phones. To a
substantial degree I have had to deal with virtually every syncml
capable device/software ever made.
In a nutshell, 2.2.x easily interoperates and can stay in sync with
virtually any other system. All one has to do is slightly relax the
core schemas to accomodate existing systems. With 2.3.x, full
interoperability is impossible.Our aim is to implement code that conforms to accepted standards. The
slapd code isn't broken here, so you're wasting your time asking us to
break it for you. Instead, you should lobby your client providers to fix
their broken software, or make a case to the IETF that the standard
needs to be fixed/relaxed. Or, break your private copy of the code and
live with it.
I humbly urge the OpenLDAP developers to reconsider this restriction
and revert to the 2.2 behaviour.
This may seem like an unreasonable hard line to you, but compromising
and allowing broken software to perpetuate doesn't do anybody any real
favors. One need only look at Microsoft Windows to understand where that
Actually, your position is understandable. And, even though I disagree I
appreciate your response and am thankful for you and everyone else that
was considerate enough to take the time to respond.
Free replacement for Exchange and Outlook (Contacts and Calendar)