directory-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kiran Ayyagari <kayyag...@apache.org>
Subject Re: empty membership in groupofnames/groupofuniquenames
Date Fri, 26 Jul 2013 20:59:59 GMT
shouldn't be an issue, cause most of the time we inject a dummy
member/uniqueMemeber at the
time of creating an entry with groupOf(Unique)Names

and otoh, changing MUST to MAY is tolerable than the other way around


On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Richard Sand <rsand@idfconnect.com> wrote:

> Hi all - I know this topic is a rehash of an age old debate, whether
> groupOfNames/groupOfUniqueNames should allow the member/uniquemember
> attributes to be empty. Many LDAP vendors allow empty groups (all from the
> Netscape lineage, CA Directory, AD) but that breaks RFC-compliance. So just
> from a practical standpoint, if I want my LDAP to behave this way, is there
> any runtime problem with changing the schema to make this attributes "MAY"
> instead of "MUST"? I tried it and a cursory test seems ok so far.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>


-- 
Kiran Ayyagari
http://keydap.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message