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

Re: All entries belong to the top object class?



On 04/26/15 23:37, Michael Ströder wrote:
dE wrote:
On 04/26/15 17:13, Michael Ströder wrote:
dE wrote:
Super this is the superclass chain --

A->B

A is defined by MUST ObjectClass MAY ( cn abc xyz cxy )
B is defined by MUST ObjectClass MAY ( cn cxy )

Then an entry belonging to B (explicit) and A (implicit, automatically added)
cannot have attributes abc and xyz.

No!

B would have MAY ( cn abc xyz cxy ).

Example for A:

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-A>
  NAME 'A'
  MAY ( cn $ abc $ xyz $ cxy ) )

These three variants have the same MAY attribute set ( cn $ abc $ xyz $ cxy ):

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-B>
  NAME 'B'
  SUP A
  MAY ( cn $ cxy ) )

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-B>
  NAME 'B'
  SUP A
  MAY ( cn $ abc $ xyz $ cxy ) )

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-B>
  NAME 'B'
  SUP A )

Ok.

So the significance of subordinate classes is to add a MUST attributes only.

No! Which text in RFC 4512 says that?


It's implied from

When creating an entry or adding an 'objectClass' value to an entry,
   all superclasses of the named classes SHALL be implicitly added

Also I don't understand what the term "significance of subordinate classes" means to you in this context.


I mean object classes subordinate to the TOP object class.

The possible attributes that any object can have is defined in the TOP object
class;

No!


But that's what you said.

These three variants have the same MAY attribute set ( cn $ abc $ xyz $ cxy ):

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-B>
  NAME 'B'
  SUP A
  MAY ( cn $ cxy ) )

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-B>
  NAME 'B'
  SUP A
  MAY ( cn $ abc $ xyz $ cxy ) )

objectclass ( <some-oid-for-B>
  NAME 'B'
  SUP A )

So entries belonging to object class B can have all attributes of object class A, in a similar way the possible attributes that any object can have is defined by the TOP object
class.

regardless of what object class the entry belongs to, any attribute
listed in the TOP object class can be added to it.

You should really read RFC 4512 more carefully and look at existing subschema. I give up now to explain.

That's the source of all confusion.

There is no IETF mailing list to discuss these issues.