Re: [ldapext] Comparing RFC2307, RFC2307bis and DBIS

Mark R Bannister <dbis@proseconsulting.co.uk> Wed, 30 September 2015 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <dbis@proseconsulting.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27A1B1A90F0 for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0M6lO0uFwQbY for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A061A90EC for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:36:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from host86-180-59-193.range86-180.btcentralplus.com ([86.180.59.193] helo=[192.168.1.67]) by mail11.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <dbis@proseconsulting.co.uk>) id 1ZhP30-0001X2-VP for ldapext@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:36:23 +0100
To: ldapext@ietf.org
References: <552C4C2F.9070804@proseconsulting.co.uk>
From: Mark R Bannister <dbis@proseconsulting.co.uk>
Message-ID: <560C55D3.3060302@proseconsulting.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:36:19 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <552C4C2F.9070804@proseconsulting.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailcore-Auth: 12040446
X-Mailcore-Domain: 1286164
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ldapext/2i-xMrXL6SPVVfMAHSP2mxxjfXk>
Subject: Re: [ldapext] Comparing RFC2307, RFC2307bis and DBIS
X-BeenThere: ldapext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: LDAP Extension Working Group <ldapext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ldapext>, <mailto:ldapext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ldapext/>
List-Post: <mailto:ldapext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ldapext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext>, <mailto:ldapext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 21:36:27 -0000

On 14/04/2015 00:07, Mark R Bannister wrote:
> I've now written up what I hope is a comprehensive comparison of 
> RFC2307, RFC2307bis and DBIS (a proposed replacement for them).
>
> I was motivated to do this after talking recently with some software 
> vendors who seemed to misunderstand DBIS, thinking that they could get 
> all the benefits of DBIS from their RFC2307 client software just by 
> remapping some attributes.  The write-up below should hopefully shed 
> more light on what you can do, what you can't do, and why DBIS is a 
> big improvement over RFC2307 or RFC2307bis.
>
> Feature comparison:
> https://sourceforge.net/p/dbis/wiki/DBIS%20and%20RFC2307%20-%20A%20Comparison/ 
>
>
> Schema comparison:
> https://sourceforge.net/p/dbis/wiki/DBIS%20and%20RFC2307%20schemas/
>
> Comments welcome as always.  Note that DBIS is still a work in 
> progress, and I will gladly receive and consider feature requests. I'm 
> also looking for individuals who can test DBIS on other platforms and 
> provide patches where necessary, as I only have access to OpenSuSE, 
> RHEL and Solaris hosts.
>
> Best regards,
> Mark Bannister.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ldapext mailing list
> Ldapext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext
>

... and further to this, I've just released DBIS 1.5.0 which now 
includes a C API, as well as the Python API and Perl API that it 
previously had.  I'll also be talking about DBIS at LDAPCon 2015.

See: http://dbis.sf.net and http://ldapcon.org/2015/?page_id=136

Best regards,
Mark.