On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 21:18, Volker Lendecke wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > But if you look at sambaAccount, it firmly ties 'uid' with 'rid', > > > which conflicts your point below. > > > > No, it doesn't. 'uid' is 'username' in ldap-speak. > > Yes, I know. And I meant it this way. I only assumed that under Unix > we have a one-to-one mapping between username and numeric uid. > > > We should not store the 'gid' as part of SambaGroup. That really is > > idmap's problem (which might refer back to exactly the same record - but > > they need to be conceptually seperated). > > We need a STRUCTURAL object to attach to. Should we make the > sambaGroupMapping structural? This would make it stand-alone, but we > could then not tie it to a posixGroup. If we make it AUXILIARY, we > need another STRUCTURAL object to attach to. Which one?
Why not both? ie, have a 'structural' that contains nothing, and hang the 'real' class off that if we don't have anything else to hang it off. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part