Re: people CN

[Thomas Lenggenhager <[e-mail]>]

Andrew Findlay wrote:
> Right - for example we have two `Andrew Smith's in our Mechanical
> Engineering Department. From our point of view the obvious
> distinguishing attribute is year-of-entry since both are undergrads,
> but it is probably not clever to use a locally-defined attribute in an
> RDN. This leaves `Description' or `Title', which I think we can live
> with.
> 
> It is almost inevitable that the two people with identical names will not
> join the institution at the same moment, so one will already have a DN
> assigned. I think it is *very important* that DNs are not changed once
> they have been assigned except for very good reason. The arrival of a
> name clash does not seem good enough, so I would expect to see the
> first `Andrew Smith' keeping his DN, with the second one getting
> something like `cn=Andrew Smith%desc=Undergraduate 1991 entry'.

Here I have a problem to follow your ideas. You strees that a DN should
be changed only for very good reasons (I agree with that). But then you
propose to use the description to form the RDN. That way you will never
be able to change that value of the attribute.

A description in my view is something that should be changed to reflect
the current situation. I don't think that the description attribute was
ever intended to be fixed once it is set.

Thomas