Hi Philip,

I was facing the same dilemma: We have an existing posixGoup structure, 
which I wanted to 'reuse' for mailgroups. (as in: adding an email 
attribute 'upgrades' a posixGroup to a group-mail address)

I also find it hard to believe the difficulties with an email attribute 
for a group. Seems such a simple and common need...?!

Anyway: Ultimately I decided to create a second group structure, 
groupOfNames, and make that groupstructre for email only, and simply 
make the (internal) rule that ALL groupOfNames are always email group 
lists, in the form: [email protected].

Your other option could be to use 'extensibleObjects' to be able to add 
an mail attribute to a groupOfNames or a posixGroup. However, this makes 
your groups non-standard, and perhaps the first option is better.

Can I ask why you choose groupOfUniqueNames, instead of groupOfNames?

Regards,
Mourik Jan

On 01/09/2013 12:22 PM, Philip Colmer wrote:
> That's interesting ... the schema that Ubuntu ship with openLDAP says
> that posixAccount is AUXILIARY but posixGroup is STRUCTURAL.
>
> Time to modify the schema :-).
>
> I still find it hard to believe, though, that there doesn't seem to be
> an official schema for defining an email address to go with a group.
> There seem to be various attempts at defining a schema but nothing seems
> to be widely adopted or official.
>
> Regards
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> On 9 January 2013 11:03, Angel Bosch <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     they've been non-structural for some time:
>     http://osdir.com/ml/ldap.umich/2006-07/msg00015.html
>
>     you can modify your schemas to make both work together. I do it all
>     the time.
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *De: *"Philip Colmer" <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>     *A: *[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *Enviat: *Dimecres, 9 de Gener 9el 2013 11:55:43
>     *Assumpte: *Re: [Lam-public] Any suggestions for combining posix
>     groups with        email groups?
>
>
>     Actually, it turns out that you can't combine posixGroup with
>     groupOfUniqueNames - they are both structural classes so you can
>     only have one of them.
>
>     So I'm still stuck. Even if I wanted to just focus on the aspect of
>     sorting out how to define an email group, groupOfUniqueNames is
>     closest to that requirement but doesn't have an attribute for the
>     email address!
>
>     Philip
>
>
>
>     On 9 January 2013 09:16, Philip Colmer <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>         Hi
>
>         Apologies if this isn't directly relevant to LAM but I'm hoping
>         that the list audience will have come across a similar challenge
>         and may have some ideas or knowledge to share.
>
>         I'm trying to use an LDAP store for both user authentication and
>         synchronisation to Google Apps. To that end, I want groups in
>         LDAP to serve two purposes: security groups and mailing lists -
>         preferably at the same time.
>
>         I'm struggling, however, to decide what objectClasses  are best
>         to use here. For example, using posixGroup allows me to specify
>         a gid, which means I can then use those groups in UNIX security
>         ACLs. However, for mailing lists, I ideally need two attributes:
>         the group owner (which I can get if I add the groupOfUniqueNames
>         class) and an email address for the list.
>
>         Unfortunately, although I *can* combine posixGroup
>         and groupOfUniqueNames, they store the membership list in
>         different attributes. Ultimately, that isn't a huge issue
>         because I can tell the Google sync tool which attribute to read
>         for the membership, and Unix will always use the memberUid
>         attribute.
>
>         Has anyone else tried to accomplish anything similar - or
>         remotely similar? If so, how did you approach it?
>
>          From a LAM perspective (bringing the question back onto
>         topic!), are there any recommendations there that might
>         influence how I solve this?
>
>         Many thanks.
>
>         Philip
>
>
>
>     
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
>     and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
>     200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
>     SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
>     http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612
>     _______________________________________________
>     Lam-public mailing list
>     [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
> and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
> 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
> SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lam-public mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS,
MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current
with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft
MVPs and experts. ON SALE this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122712
_______________________________________________
Lam-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public

Reply via email to