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

Re: Q: "opjectClass: top" or not?


On Wed, 20 Nov 2013, Ulrich Windl wrote:

Sorry, this is a somewhat generic question: I wonder what difference it makes whether I specify "objectClass: top" for an object, or not: Conceptually, "top" is included automatically (so the objectClass attribute goes to any structural class), but when I fetch an object, I never see the "top" objectClass. Explicitly specifying "objectClass: top" makes every object a few bytes larger. So is there any reason to explicitly specify "objectClass: top"?

very interesting point.

I have a customer with an enterprise application that insists on having an explicit objectClass: top on all entries.

Their developers argue that the rfcs mandate an explicit objectClass: top on all entries.  I argue that the wording in the respective rfcs is not exact enough.  Having an objectClass that inherits from top should be enough from my point of view.

I am currently travelling and cannot lookup the rfc.


Christian Kratzer                      CK Software GmbH
Email:   ck@cksoft.de                  Wildberger Weg 24/2
Phone:   +49 7032 893 997 - 0          D-71126 Gaeufelden
Fax:     +49 7032 893 997 - 9          HRB 245288, Amtsgericht Stuttgart
Web:     http://www.cksoft.de/         Geschaeftsfuehrer: Christian Kratzer