Re: [ldapext] DBIS - new IETF drafts

Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> Wed, 08 January 2014 20:08 UTC

Return-Path: <michael@stroeder.com>
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 291031AE597 for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 12:08:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.839
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.839 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 VFVDRv_BpIwO for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 12:08:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from srv1.stroeder.com (srv1.stroeder.com [213.240.180.113]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 135141ADFA6 for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 12:08:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by srv1.stroeder.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 576BA606A0; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 21:07:58 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at stroeder.com
Received: from srv1.stroeder.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (srv1.stroeder.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zNFvd8Kw9piF; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 21:07:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.1.0.2] (unknown [10.1.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Michael Str??der", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by srv1.stroeder.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9419660715; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 20:07:47 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <52CDA099.9070300@stroeder.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 20:01:45 +0100
From: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/26.0 SeaMonkey/2.23
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark R Bannister <dbis@proseconsulting.co.uk>, Simo <s@ssimo.org>, Howard Chu <hyc@highlandsun.com>
References: <52C9BED5.2080900@proseconsulting.co.uk> <52CAEA7D.5030002@highlandsun.com> <1389033674.27654.32.camel@pico.ipa.ssimo.org> <52CB2030.3010403@proseconsulting.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <52CB2030.3010403@proseconsulting.co.uk>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="------------ms090706090308050401000908"
Cc: ldapext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ldapext] DBIS - new IETF drafts
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 08 Jan 2014 20:08:10 -0000

Mark R Bannister wrote:
> On 06/01/2014 18:41, Simo wrote:
>> I have to say I have to agree with Howard here, although I wouldn't consider
>> rfc2307bis *the* solution, at least it tried to fix some of the most glaring
>> issues ion rfc2307, there is lots that can be improved of course, but the
>> direction is good. 

Was Simo's message personal or did I miss a posting by him to the ietf-ldapext
list?

>> And especially netgroups, please spare us from the disease of NIS
>> netgroups, they should be buried, there are much better ways to group
>> diverse objects.
> 
> Please provide a technical description of "disease" please, because it's hard
> to do anything constructive with a statement like that.

@Simo: I know that FreeIPA/sssd has a custom schema. Is there a formal
description of the schema so we can look at what cure you're implementing for
the netgroups "disease"?

Personally I also avoid netgroups (or I don't have a real use-case for them
for now).

Ciao, Michael.