Op vrijdag 23-05-2008 om 12:08 uur [tijdzone -0400], schreef Brian Thompson: > Thomas De Reyck wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I am not sure if this is the correct place to ask this kind of > > information, so if I am mistaken, I apologize.. > > > > I am quite new to LDAP, however I have used some applications that > > require it and am now a semi-decent openLDAP administrator. So, as a > > next step, I am trying to program an address book with an LDAP backend. > > I have noticed that usually the cn is used as a dn when working with > > address book entries. This seems to lead to an interesting conflict > > which I need to resolve before I begin to program: > > > > What can be done when one has to import 2 people with an identical > >name? > > > > This seems to be irrelevant, since the chances of an identical name are > > small, but I for one know 2 people with the same first and last ames. > > Lets face it: names are not MD5 hashes ;-).. > > > > I guess someone must have thought this over before.. how oes one > > resolve this problem cleanly? Does one use another property? f so, > > which one? > > > > I am aware that this might be a very silly question, but I have een > > wondering about this for a few days now and google doesn't eem to > > satisfy my need for a solution.. :-). > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Thomas De Reyck > > > > > > We use the UID attribute as the first portion of the DN, which > is an id unique to every student/faculty/staff. That solves the > issue of conflicting DNs. > > Regarding the CN attribute, in our directory the CN attribute > is multivalued and contains several permutations of their name > ("first initial last name", "first name middle initial last name", etc) > so it's very common for searches to come up with multiple > matches when searching by name. > > Best you can do when searching only by name and two people > have the same name is to show the search results with some > additional info from their entries such as title, department, bldg, > etc and hope the end user can figure out who is who. > > -Brian > This is indeed a valid solution, and it has crossed my mind a few times before.. However, I find it to be a bit impractical to have to assign UID's to people in an address book.. Does anyone maybe have a somewhat more elegant solution in mind?
Description: Dit berichtdeel is digitaal ondertekend