directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ole Ersoy <ole.er...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Terminology] Partition?
Date Sat, 31 Mar 2007 21:50:00 GMT
<warning>I'm not wikipedia,

Much better I think :-)

OK - So I just explain, along with examples,
that the partition is the "smallest" base DN
or naming context?

Thanks for the elaboration,
- Ole



Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Ole Ersoy a écrit :
> 
>> Hi Stefan
>>
>> Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>> <snip/>
>>
>>>> Is this standard LDAP speak, or ADS dialect?
>>>
>>>
>>> In RFC4512 that is called 'naming context'. In common speach it is often
>>> called 'base DN'.
>>>
>>
>> OK - So when I describe partitions in the concept document
>> I can say that they are effectively the same as "naming contexts"
>> or "base DNs", but we added the partition concept in ApacheDS to
>> to describe a base DN that can be backed by it's own DIT implementation?
> 
> The partition concept is not specific to ADS. You will find it in Active 
> Directory too , but more generally, this is a X500 concept :
> "X.501, “Information Technology—Open Systems Interconnection—The 
> Directory: Models,” defines the term naming context as, “A subtree of 
> entries held in a single master DSA.” It goes on to describe the process 
> of dividing a tree into multiple naming contexts as /partitioning."
> 
> <warning>I'm not wikipedia, so the following part may be a bad 
> interpretation of me</warning>
> Base DN is really totally different : this is the starting point for an 
> operation. For instance, when you do a Search, you start it from a 
> position in your tree, and this position is named "base DN". The base DN 
> for your partition is the starting point for any operation on your 
> partition/DIT. So to speak, a partition/DIT is described by it's DN 
> which is a baseDN (you can't cut it anymore, like an atom).
> 
> There is some confusion about this term, I think.
> Emmanuel/
> 

Mime
View raw message