Hi Eric, On Wednesday, 21. June 2006 13:30, Eric Nichols wrote: > dn: CN=Common-Name,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=vm-2k3,DC=com > changetype: add > objectClass: top > objectClass: attributeSchema > cn: Common-Name > distinguishedName: > CN=Common-Name,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=vm-2k3,DC=com instanceType: 4 > whenCreated: 20021023015013.0Z > whenChanged: 20021023015013.0Z > uSNCreated: 124 > attributeID: 2.5.4.3 > attributeSyntax: 2.5.5.12 > isSingleValued: TRUE > rangeLower: 1 > rangeUpper: 64 > mAPIID: 14863 > uSNChanged: 124 > showInAdvancedViewOnly: TRUE > adminDisplayName: Common-Name > adminDescription: Common-Name > oMSyntax: 64 > searchFlags: 1 > lDAPDisplayName: cn > name: Common-Name > objectGUID:: 9pY09C317kWYEH7+YvuAWg== > schemaIDGUID:: P3mWv+YN0BGihQCqADBJ4g== > attributeSecurityGUID:: VAGN5Pi80RGHAgDAT7lgUA== > systemOnly: FALSE > systemFlags: 18 > isMemberOfPartialAttributeSet: TRUE > objectCategory: > CN=Attribute-Schema,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=vm-2k3,DC=com
I am sorry, but this is not something that Net::LDAP::Schema can make use of. A standard conforming schema entry for cn liiks something like: attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.3 NAME ( 'cn' 'commonName' ) DESC 'RFC2256: common name(s) for which the entity is known by' SUP name ) It looks like MS used its own variant of the LDAP standard. BTW they also did it by - treating regular searches as searchies for the 1st page of a paged search - forcibly introducing the attribute option range=.... when searching for members of large groups (> 1500 members) - ... (I guess there are more of those "interpretations of the standard") I know there are workarounds for these "features" and some of the settings can be changed (e.g. pagesize, ...), but to me this looks like the well known strategy of calling something a standard what in fact is a private deviation. Sorry for the rant Peter -- Peter Marschall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
