--On Friday, March 10, 2006 3:15 PM -0300 Andres Tarallo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I'm in the process of designing and setting a new LDAP server for our
university. We're designing the tree structure, but we have some dubts
about it.

We want to store in the tree contact information for all the people that
work and study at the university. People lie into three different
categories: staff, academic staff (teachers and researcher) and
students. Is not rare that a person belongs to two categories: a teacher
is part of the staff or a student is also a teacher or research
assistant.  We want to enable access to certain resources based on user
category, we also need that when you search for a person you can find it
no matter which category he is . It doesn't make sense for dupplicating
date in each category: Do we have a more elegant solution?

I would argue against separating people out based on affiliation (as another responder also noted). It is much better to track affiliations in an attribute in an entry rather than to organize people by those affiliations (especially since affiliations can also change).

Stanford puts every person entry in a single tree: cn=people,dc=stanford,dc=edu.

As noted, eduPerson may help you.

You may want to browse the Stanford Tree structure for some ideas as well:

<http://www.stanford.edu/services/directory/trees/>


We also have the problem that a perosn might have access to different
systems, soit might have a collection of passwords. Here we are dealing
with the idea of putting all the password in the same object or have
objects hanging from the owner.

Well, I can only suggest implementing an SSO type system... It really solves a lot of problems.

--Quanah

--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Developer
ITS/Shared Application Services
Stanford University
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html

---
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE as the 
SUBJECT of the message.

Reply via email to