IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ldapext] Schema for posixGroup successor (RFC 2307 bis)

Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> Thu, 12 February 2015 11:53 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 084AB1A8547 for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 03:53:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.312
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.312 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 Fxv4_eD_M9Rq for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 03:53:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from srv1.stroeder.com (srv1.stroeder.com [213.240.180.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8E431A6F38 for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 03:53:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from srv4.stroeder.local (srv4.stroeder.local [10.1.1.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.stroeder.local", Issuer "stroeder.com Server CA no. 2009-07" (not verified)) by srv1.stroeder.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D9851CF7A; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 11:53:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by srv4.stroeder.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478491D711; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 11:53:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at stroeder.local
Received: from srv4.stroeder.local ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (srv4.stroeder.local [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iepxBPWyCzFE; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 11:53:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from nb2.stroeder.local (nb2.stroeder.local [10.1.1.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by srv4.stroeder.local (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A1E81CE20; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 11:53:00 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <54DC941C.3070504@stroeder.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 12:53:00 +0100
From: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.32.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Findlay <andrew.findlay@skills-1st.co.uk>
References: <54DB27C7.3060409@stroeder.com> <20150212102738.GC3229@slab.skills-1st.co.uk> <54DC8BD7.3040009@stroeder.com> <20150212114807.GG3229@slab.skills-1st.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20150212114807.GG3229@slab.skills-1st.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="------------ms050502080201070801000401"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ldapext/EhGJencRmZo7Ha0BSa-k3lQAg9w>
Cc: ldapext <ldapext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ldapext] Schema for posixGroup successor (RFC 2307 bis)
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: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 11:53:15 -0000

Andrew Findlay wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:17:43PM +0100, Michael Ströder wrote:
>> In draft-howard-rfc2307bis-02 'posixGroup' is declared as AUXILIARY, a change
>> which is forbidden according to Kurt's IANA rules.  And the draft contains a
>> declaration of 'groupOfMembers' which is pretty much the same as
>> 'groupOfEntries'.  We will sort that out...
> 
> Right. That is why I want to separate the groups work from any 2307
> updates as far as possible.

+1

Could you please go ahead pushing draft-findlay-ldap-groupofentries?

> That would be useful. Are we agreed about how it *should* work?
> My understanding is:
> 
> The new class has a set of MUST attributes that is the union of the
> MUST attributes of the superior classes.
> The new class has a set of MAY attributes that is the union of the
> MAY attributes of the superior classes.
> Any attribute that is MUST in one superior and MAY in another will
> become MUST in the new class.

That's exactly how I see it.

Ciao, Michael.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email