Yes their extreme details are lacking, but at an introductory level, they explain things very well for newcomers that all the grizzled old timers could not be bothered explaining. I think they should avoid the extreme detail (which can change over time) and stick to general ldap principals. LDAP is a odd beast, if you have not already been doing it for a decade or so.
So they provide some value. But perhaps not to grizzled old timers (present company excluded of course). Cheers Brett On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > On May 22, 2014, at 5:23 AM, Mike Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Quoting Artur Nike <[email protected]>: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> > >> Is the suffix dc=example,dc=com in tree is a valid rdn ? > > > > A suffix is an RDN of it's own entry because it sits at the root and is > relative to itself. However, if your suffix was dc=com, and you created a > subentry called dc=example, then it's a different story. So, it just > depends on how you construct your suffix. > > > > > >> and whether the drawing > >> http://www.zytrax.com/books/ldap/ch2/dit-dn-rdn.pngis correct? > > > > All in all, everything I have seen in zytrax is high quality info > > Then you must not read their LDAP bits very closely. They are quite often > dead wrong in what they have online and the best thing for everyone would > be for their site to go offline. > > --Quanah > -- Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain
