Re: [ldapext] groupOfEntries object class proposal

[Luke Howard <[e-mail]>]

Another thing that would be useful might be to define the behaviour of 
nested groups, eg. should the client expand them?

It would make sense to use this object class for rfc2307bis too 
(whenever that is completed :-))

-- Luke

Andrew Findlay wrote:
> At the recent LDAP conference in Cologne there was wide support for an
> effort to improve some of the commonly-used schema definitions. In
> particular, the fact that groupOfNames does not permit an empty group
> was felt to be a significant problem.
>
> To address this problem, I have published an I-D proposing a new
> objectclass called groupOfEntries. The I-D is appended and is also
> available at:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-findlay-ldap-groupofentries-00.txt
>
> To make adoption as easy as possible, the new object class is
> identical to groupOfNames except that it has the ability to
> describe empty groups without resorting to tricks and workarounds.
>
> I would like to see this new class used in place of groupOfNames in
> new designs, so I propose to ask IETF to consider the draft for the
> Standards Track.
>
> Comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome, and should be
> sent to the [e-mail] mailing list.
>
> Andrew
>   


-- 
www.padl.com | www.lukehoward.com


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