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

Re: How to best handle DN+String and DN+Binary in OL?

Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 18:25 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
Howard Chu wrote:
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 14:16 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
What is the best way to get OpenLDAP to understand it needs to match on
and follow references to the DN part of these values?

Good question. So far the only way to get DN semantics is by using
distinguishedName syntax. In a few places we've also special-cased recognition
of NameAndOptionalUID syntax, but that's not universal. I suppose, if you can
shoehorn your extra blobs into the UID portion, you can use that syntax and we
can figure out where else it needs to be accepted.

Looking over the definition of NameAndOptionalUID, shoehorn would
certainly be the correct expression...  But yes, it looks to me like I
just need to convert every binary or string element into a bitstring of
it's bits.

Yeah, bitstrings are a PITA. The better way might be to just define a new
syntax and matching rules that stores exactly what you want. We can define a
new syntax flag SLAP_SYNTAX_DN_LIKE or somesuch, and change all of those
places that were hardcoded to look for DN syntax to use this flag instead.

The other places that are interesting in this regard are in the ACL engine and
anything that uses librewrite. Rewrites are trickier because the rewrite code
needs to be able to isolate just the DN portion for rewriting, and preserve
any other blob attached to an attribute.

So, how do I define a new syntax for this?

Have a look at the contributed code in ITS#6247 for an example.


  -- Howard Chu
  CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
  Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/