Subject: Re: RFC2251: RootDSE subschemasubentry issue

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 08:08:42 -0500

Greetings,

I believe that this was discussed on the mailing list about 6 months ago.
At that time, the general direction seemed to be that  the rootDSE entry
would contain an additional attribute:

subschemasubentries

which would be defined to have distinguishedName syntax.  And while this
does not provide the detailed mapping (offered in Kurt's response), of
associating namingContext values with subschemasubentries values, it also
does not introduce another attribute value format that needs to be parsed.
The X.500 specifications give some guidance on the placement of
subschemasubentry values, namely they are to be placed "just below" the
namingContext and should have object class: top, subentry,
subschemasubentry.

So, I would add a fourth option for the rootDSE:

namingContexts: ou=Sales, o=Widgets
namingContexts: ou=Development, o=Widgets
subschemasubentries: cn=schema, ou=Sales, o=Widgets
subschemasubentries: cn=schema, ou=Development, o=Widgets

Regards,
Tim Hahn

Internet: [email-masked]
Internal: Timothy Hahn/Endicott/IBM@IBMUS or IBMUSM00(HAHNT)
phone: 607.752.6388     tie-line: 8/852.6388
fax: 607.752.3681

---

From: "Salter, Thomas A" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 09:08:50 -0500

Instead of inventing new attributes or syntaxes, why not just say that the
subschema for a naming context can be discovered by reading the
subschemaSubentry attribute in the naming context?

---

From: Mark Wahl <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 12:20:45 -0600

> As long as a client can discover the NCs, it can discover the entire 
> set of subschema subentries.

This doesn't work where there are subschema administrative areas inside of 
naming contexts.  You put the subschema subentry below the subschema admin 
point, not below the naming context prefix.

Mark Wahl, Directory Product Architect
Innosoft International, Inc.