Re: [ldapext] DBIS commentary

Jordan Brown <Jordan.Brown@oracle.com> Wed, 02 December 2015 16:39 UTC

Return-Path: <Jordan.Brown@oracle.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 15EA81B2BDB for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:39:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 Hle_sOT8-qjv for <ldapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:39:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 354271B2BE5 for <ldapext@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:39:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tB2GdMoM028050 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 16:39:22 GMT
Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB2GdLX2001676 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 16:39:21 GMT
Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB2GdLXL001318; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 16:39:21 GMT
Received: from [10.159.135.55] (/10.159.135.55) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 08:39:21 -0800
To: "Bannister, Mark" <Mark.Bannister@morganstanley.com>
References: <5655E4F0.7030809@oracle.com> <814F4E458AA9FF4E89CF1A9EDA0DE2A932F618A3@OZWEX0209N1.msad.ms.com> <565CAC30.6010701@oracle.com> <814F4E458AA9FF4E89CF1A9EDA0DE2A932F8EAFD@OZWEX0209N2.msad.ms.com> <565DDE78.5030908@oracle.com> <814F4E458AA9FF4E89CF1A9EDA0DE2A932F8F30E@OZWEX0209N2.msad.ms.com>
From: Jordan Brown <Jordan.Brown@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <565F1EB2.9060405@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 08:39:14 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <814F4E458AA9FF4E89CF1A9EDA0DE2A932F8F30E@OZWEX0209N2.msad.ms.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060600090203030008030702"
X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ldapext/RGgVQI-tqZWxhCmMAFvLD-FaTic>
Cc: "'ldapext@ietf.org'" <ldapext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ldapext] DBIS commentary
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, 02 Dec 2015 16:39:26 -0000

On 12/2/2015 12:59 AM, Bannister, Mark wrote:
>
> Jordan Brown wrote:
>
> > Do note again that RFC 4876 mapping would let you redirect the clients to use a custom
>
> > case-sensitive attribute, or attributes from different auxiliary classes.
>
> I should really have made it clear that DBIS supersedes RFC 4876, and introduces 
> more
>
> powerful mapping constructs.  With DBIS, you can support an RFC2307 schema (case
>
> insensitive) and the DBIS schema (case sensitive) from the same client if you so 
> choose,
>
> and at several levels.  You could have groups of hosts with case sensitive maps 
> vs. groups
>
> of host with case insensitive maps.  You could have a host where some maps are case
>
> sensitive and some are not.  You can even have parts of a map provided via one 
> schema
>
> and parts from another, i.e. case sensitivity for some entries and insensitivity 
> for others
>
> if that’s really what you wished to do.  If you use DBIS, you certainly have no 
> need to
>
> use RFC 4876.
>

Ah, indeed.  So if there were case-sensitive and case-insensitive attributes 
available (presumably in different auxiliary classes), you could use those mapping 
constructs to choose the non-default variation.

It doesn't look like you've got 4876 completely covered, though. Attribute mapping 
is only one of the things it does - it also tells the clients which servers to 
connect to and what authentication schemes to use.  If you're replacing 4876, 
there should be a plan for replacing that capability.

> Jordan Brown wrote:
>
> > Mark Bannister wrote:
>
> > > Btw, what was your plan for case sensitivity in filesystems?
>
> >
>
> > Baby steps :-)
>
> >
>
> > I do think that that's inevitable too, just not as soon as user names
>
> Wow.  Good luck with that.  (Boiling oceans comes to mind).
>

I work in name services, not file systems, so it's not an active project.  I just 
think it'll happen eventually, that interoperability with Windows will force it.