Hi,
It seems I was not very clear on what I was asking. Let me give it another
shot.
We have subentries which contain subtreeSpecifications (SS). The SS is a
very powerful mechanism
for selecting entries in the DIT. It's essentially a means to group entries
together and much more powerful
than what is currently used in practice for dynamic groups: dynamic groups
uses an LDAP URL to
dynamically select the users for inclusion in the group.
I was wondering if a application specific form of this could be used for
dynamic groups instead of using a
simple LDAP URL.
The problem with an SS is that it's USAGE is a directoryOperation and it's
base is relative to the position
of the Administrative Point (AP). What if we defined a means for
applications to group together entries based
on this concept. Say we have the following objectClass for a
subtreeSelector:
objectclass ( 1.3.6.1.4.1.18060.0.4.1.3.11 NAME 'subtreeSelector'
DESC 'application level mechanism for specifying subtrees with specified
base'
SUP top
STRUCTURAL
MAY ( selectorFilter $ minimum $ maximum $ chopBefore $ chopAfter )
MUST ( cn & selectorBase )
)
I'm sure you can figure out what the may and must attributes correspond to
along with their
characteristics: i.e. chopBefore is a distinguishedName syntax multivalued
attribute etc.
So why are we (LDAP community) not leveraging something this powerful
instead of using
a simple URL to define dynamic groups.
Alex
On 9/21/07, Ersin Er <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 9/21/07, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Any reason why LDAP never defined application level subtree
> > specification mechanisms? Right now the subentry is used
> > with the a operational usage for the main subtreeSpecification
> > attribute. Also the base is AP position relative. Why not
> > have an application space specification and use that for dynamic
> > grouping?
>
>
> I think Netscape family implements Roles (like dynamic groups) using
> Subentries. As far as I know, OpenDS implements subtreeSpecifications with
> RootDSE as the base relative position. But none of these are standard.
>
> Any thoughts?
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Ersin Er
> http://www.ersin-er.name
