It's not important, it's just very convenient.

Le vendredi 21 octobre 2016, Patrick Brunmayr <[email protected]> a
écrit :

> Some very valid aspects here :)
>
> The kind of question is what makes InetOrgPerson so important ? In my
> understanding a basic user is
>
> about uid and a password. Thats very abstract but the minimal form of a an
> identity
>
>
> Am 20.10.2016 um 16:51 schrieb Emmanuel Lécharny:
>
> Some thoughts about Users and fortress (I have read teh full thread, and
> there are many aspects being discussed, I'd like to provide some general
> ideas here, nt to reply to any specific question).
>
>
> Fortress uses its own AttributeType and ObjectClasses, and relies on
> existing ObjectClasses : typically, InetOrgPerson for Users. The other
> Fortress objectClasses are AUXILLIARY, and taht allows any entry to be
> extended with attributes that are no conflicing with any STRUCTURAL
> ObjectClass.
>
>
> The thing is that an Entry in LDAP *must* have a STRUCTURAL ObjectClass,
> otherwise you won't be able to add it. This is the reson Fortress is
> using InetOrgPerson.
>
>
> Now, that does not fit everyone, because you may want to use a different
> STRUCTURAL ObjectClass, and that is not possible if it's not inheriting
> from InetOrgPerson in this case.
>
> One option would be to let the developper to decide which STRUCTURAL
> class should be the root of the Users Entries, but that does not fit
> well with Fortress, because te 'cn' and 'sn' attributes are mandatory in
> te InetOgPerson ObjectClass. Moreover, Fortress is expecing may of the
> InetOrgPerson attributeType to be present...
>
>
> The idea would be for Fortress to still let the user select which
> STRUCTURAL ObjectClass to use, and to default to a specific FortressUser
> STRUCTURAL ObjectClass, taht would mimic InetOrgPerson (but wth no
> mandatory attributeTypes). All teh needed attributes will be defined
> into AUXILLIARY ObjectClasses (including cn and sn).
>
>
> Fro teh API point of view, thsi is easy, and it will just require a
> configuration: the STRUCTURAL to use.
>
>
> From Commander POV (the UI), that is a different story. The point being
> that it's impossible to anticipate all the possible needs for all the
> possible application out there. One solution would be to expose the User
> using a tabular representation, regardless of the attribute content and
> order (that means we lose all teh semantic). Anothe roption, way more
> complex, would be to define templates that will be specific : they will
> tell teh GUI what and how to expose the data. This is definitively be a
> very complex change in Commander...
>
>
> Bottom line, I think some changes are required in Fortress, to stp using
> InetOrgPerson. Changes in Commander are certainly going to be heavy...
>
>
> Le 18/10/16 à 11:30, Patrick Brunmayr a écrit :
>
>
> Hi
>
> In my understanding Apache Fortress claims the sovereignty over creating
> users. Thats just fine but i see a problem here. After reading the
> docs here
>
> https://directory.apache.org/fortress/gen-docs/latest/apidoc
> s/org/apache/directory/fortress/core/AdminMgr.html#addUser-
> org.apache.directory.fortress.core.model.User-
>
>
> there is no way of assigning custom auxialiary object classes or
> attributes to the user. The user just represents inetOrgPerson which in
> most of the cases will be fine.
>
> In our scenario users MUST have two extra auxialiary object classes and
> some extra attributes set to be a valid user. ( I know about ftProps but
> these represent no attributes )
>
> I am writing an adapter which transfers users from different systems
> into Apache Fortress by using the AdminMgr. My problem is calling
> addUser may create a valid inetOrgPerson object
>
> but not a valid user object for our system. I would need to make an
> extra LDAP call to assign this object classes and attributes. This would
> even make the web interface quite unusable for our admins
>
> beacause we can not manage our users on a central place. Apache Fortress
> may create a valid inetOrgPerson but i would need an extra UI or config
> tool to set the other
>
> object classes.
>
>
> What can i do about this ?
>
> Thank u
>
>
> LINZ AG für Energie, Telekommunikation, Verkehr und Kommunale Dienste
> A-4021 Linz, Wiener Straße 151, Postfach 1300, Tel. +43/732/3400-0,
> E-Mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> LINZ AG für Energie, Telekommunikation, Verkehr und Kommunale Dienste
> A-4021 Linz, Wiener Straße 151, Postfach 1300, Tel. +43/732/3400-0,
> E-Mail: [email protected]
>
>
>

-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com

Reply via email to