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

Re: Uid with '+' sign ?

To: "Christiaan den Besten" <chris@scorpion.nl>
Subject: Re: Uid with '+' sign ?
From: Peter Marschall <peter@adpm.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:17:05 +0100
Cc: OpenLDAP-software@OpenLDAP.org
Content-disposition: inline
In-reply-to: <03bc01c52ef5$47f0b630$3d64880a@speedy>
Organization: ADPM
References: <01b701c52edb$41eb6ab0$3d64880a@speedy> <200503221526.56117.peter@adpm.de> <03bc01c52ef5$47f0b630$3d64880a@speedy>
User-agent: KMail/1.7.2

Hi,

On Tuesday 22 March 2005 16:39, Christiaan den Besten wrote:
> But now I get a LDAP_NAMING_VIOLATION.
>
> ---
> uid=babette\+herman,ou=domain.com,ou=Domain,o=domain,c=nl, failed
> with : 64, LDAP_NAMING_VIOLATION
> ---
>
> I am using the default OpenLDAP schema's + qmail schema.

Can you provide the LDIF entry in question ?

Peter

-- 
Peter Marschall
eMail: peter@adpm.de

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Uid with '+' sign ?
  - From: "Christiaan den Besten" <chris@scorpion.nl>

References:
- Uid with '+' sign ?
  - From: "Christiaan den Besten" <chris@scorpion.nl>
- Re: Uid with '+' sign ?
  - From: Peter Marschall <peter@adpm.de>
- Re: Uid with '+' sign ?
  - From: "Christiaan den Besten" <chris@scorpion.nl>

Prev by Date: Re: Solaris 9 LDAP client - different behaviour with back-bdb and back-ldbm
Next by Date: Kerberos + SASL question
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread