Subject: [ldapext] NameAndOptionalUID, uniqueMember, RFC4517, RFC4519

From: Howard Chu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:32:12 -0800

Probably a little late for this... It seems to me that the description 
of this syntax and attribute are deficient because they make no direct 
reference to the x500UniqueIdentifier attribute, which is an inherent 
component of this type. I.e., the syntax definition offers no 
description of where the unique identifier came from, it's described as 
if it is just an arbitrary bitstring that came out of the blue. But in 
fact it is specifically the content of the x500UniqueIdentifier 
attribute of the named entry.

Likewise, the example for uniqueMember in RFC4519 is deficient. It says 
"a new battalion with the "same" name would have a unique identifier 
value added" but this fails to note that the identifier must live 
somewhere, not just in the uniqueMember attribute itself. That is, it 
should explicitly say that an x500UniqueIdentifier is added to the 
target entry, and its value gets used in the uniqueMember attribute 
value. Overall the example leaves a lot to be desired; an object named 
by an "ou" attribute is most likely an organizationalUnit, but 
x500UniqueIdentifier is not a valid attribute of that object class. In 
fact the only object class in any published RFC that uses 
x500UniqueIdentifier is inetOrgPerson, in RFC2798.

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

_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext