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

Ludovic Poitou <ludovic.poitou@gmail.com> Thu, 12 February 2015 12:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ludovic.poitou@gmail.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 0547A1A6EF2 for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:33:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 DPzxqyWPycCx for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:33:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x230.google.com (mail-wg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 256EE1A1BFE for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:33:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id l18so6668528wgh.7 for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:33:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-type; bh=ZCmOCclK0a+nJKGr9AkBKRoBFOwis5bEPBZBxrkhTgA=; b=tc7rR194mdyXsGN7Qb7rEuFZRpfBxc+0n+eZJP6ThgV7pTE8z7uf35t3ThYKaLMvcQ ETIFRQ6jSmWkCtMMbuHcoBGrpRT5C8rs9afFiz5MqiM6mFeaLSS7Xm+Es1pg0I8KJ13X EwQw1E+jmaTAeky1s2P3RNLbiJjbHjG+YSG0ARjMLBsHug9t4n+5c/cqDlXPPPHmQLEx RUkmGbfQAvCuoDNuIWcWEYWz0B5xFHH2lPwYYmDCpblZh9ZTdPeoEWq4FptfUA5D5DC4 dAEbC7jrQp2KOsbf7e7N4ijWpoMTaGQ3jvy54OcclGc6yrSFDtlJCp86cDjz1pmZZEXL GSMQ==
X-Received: by 10.181.13.81 with SMTP id ew17mr5634929wid.87.1423744387709; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:33:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lpm.local ([46.218.40.139]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dx11sm2601943wjb.23.2015.02.12.04.33.06 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:33:06 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:33:05 +0100
From: Ludovic Poitou <ludovic.poitou@gmail.com>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Michael_Str=C3=B6der?= <michael@stroeder.com>
Message-ID: <etPan.54dc9d81.26f324ba.15e@lpm.local>
In-Reply-To: <54DC9CFD.3010309@stroeder.com>
References: <54DB27C7.3060409@stroeder.com> <20150212102738.GC3229@slab.skills-1st.co.uk> <54DC8BD7.3040009@stroeder.com> <20150212114807.GG3229@slab.skills-1st.co.uk> <54DC941C.3070504@stroeder.com> <etPan.54dc9bdd.43f18422.15e@lpm.local> <54DC9CFD.3010309@stroeder.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail Beta (289)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="54dc9d81_7f01579b_15e"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ldapext/FoySuOy4vU2-9cob5yMKTLXcyMY>
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 12:33:15 -0000

Michael,

Yes, you’re right, I have RFC2307bis defined. Good point.

Ludo

-- 
Ludovic Poitou
http://ludopoitou.com

On 12 Feb 2015 at 13:31:05, Michael Ströder (michael@stroeder.com) wrote:

Ludovic Poitou wrote:  
> I was trying to define the posixGroup2 object class in OpenDJ, and the  
> server refuses it because we do not allow to define a structural  
> objectClass that inherits from auxiliary objectClasses.  

Then you have a schema installed which is not pure RFC 2307!  

Probably you already have a RFC2307bis-like schema workaround added which  
violates Kurt's IANA guidelines.  

> And this is the proper behavior as RFC4512, section 2.4.2 specifically calls it:  

Yes, mixed inheritance of STRUCTURAL and AUXILIARY object classes is not allowed!  

Ciao, Michael.