Re: Missing Syntax description in the cn=subschema's LDAPSyntaxes AT

[Emmanuel LÃcharny <elecharny@gmail.com>]

Le 2/14/12 1:19 PM, Michael StrÃder a Ãcrit :
> Emmanuel LÃcharny wrote:
> > In Apache Directory Studio and
> > the Java LDAP API, it's a bit more annoying, as we try to load the 
> > full schema
> > from the server to locally check that values are correct before 
> > sending them
> > back to the server. We have a mechanism to 'bypass' the missing 
> > syntaxes, of
> > course, but I think that from a completness POV, it would be better if
> > OpenLDAP add those missing syntaxes...
>
> As a developer of a generic, schema-aware LDAPv3 client you should 
> prepared to deal with incomplete/false subschema. Otherwise your 
> client will joke very often.
We *are* ready to handle such schemas. M$ AD is most certainly the worst 
use case around. The question is more about OpenLDAP compliance : does 
those missing Syntaxes deserve an ITS or not.

--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel LÃcharny
www.iktek.com