Subject: [ldapext] NIS, RFC2307, RFC2307bis, DBIS, whatever...

From: Michael Ströder <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 19:29:42 +0100

HI!

This is a purely organizational posting.

*** Please do not follow-up on technical details in this thread!!! ***

Reviewing the recent RFC2307bis/DBIS e-mail thread I think long texts discussing
various topics at once is a real obstacle to get people involved.

I also strongly feel that trying to solve all problems at once with one big
solution will make it really hard to reach some sort of consensus on particular
work items.  Rather people should be able to pick certain aspects to solve part
of the problem in their particular deployment.

I'd vote for dividing the NIS/LDAP topic into several sub-topics already raised
and start separate mail threads:

1. Case-sensitive vs. case-insensitive names
further divided into:
- Scope: POSIX vs. rest-of-world
- User/login names
- Group names
- Service names

2. posixAccount vs. posixUserAccount (DBIS) vs. whatever
- current common posixAccount usage (structural object class etc.)
- gecos field: displayName vs. configurable mapping etc.
- IANA considerations

3. Groups
- current groupOfNames/posixGroup practice
- empty groups (groupOfEntries)
- attribute memberUID vs. member vs. whatever
- IANA considerations

4. Host/service groups
- NIS netgroups vs. groupOfNames vs. other host groups schema
- which approaches are really used?

5. Client configuration profiles:
- RFC 4876 usage
- DBIS

Feel free to extend this.

Next steps:

1. I'd be very thankful if people could step up picking *one* sub-topic and
start a separate discussion thread ideally first summarizing which approaches
for this particular sub-topic were considered in the past or lying on the table
as I-D.  Please stay neutral and do not start such a sub-thread endorsing a
particular solution.

2. The goal for each discussion thread should be to work out a set of real
hard requirements or to agree that there is no consensus on the requirements.

3. After that hopefully we can agree which work items are put into the charter.

I'm quite aware that some of the topics above overlap.  But please let's try to
be disciplined and get more structure into the discussion.  Otherwise I don't
see a chance to get work done.

Ciao, Michael.