Subject: IPP> FWD: emerging directory schema standards?

From: [email-masked] (JK Martin)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 96 14:53 EST

This message was just posted to the LDAP mailing list.  I thought
some of the folks on the IPP list might find this a bit interesting,
given that we expect LDAP to play a critical role in providing the
vehicle for locating printers.

	...jay

----- Begin Included Message -----

>From terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu!owner-ldap Tue Nov 26 12:40:09 1996
X-Sender: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 09:17:46 -0600
To: Rob Winters <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
From: "Steven E. Newton" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: emerging directory schema standards?
Mime-Version: 1.0

At 02:54 PM 11/25/96 -0500, you wrote:
>I'd appreciate being pointed to any existing or proposed standards,
>white papers, etc, that discuss the standardization of directory
>schema for Internet directories.
>
Well, unfortunately, IMHO, the LDAP people didn't fully do their homework
as far as directory schema go.  The x.500 people did, however, and there
are several RFCs related to directory schema. I would suggest rfcs 1274,
1617, and 1803 to start with.  But, I doubt the various vendors will pay
attention to them.  Actually, it seems, and I regret this direction very
much, that the vendors seem to want to go with a directory server that is
NOT an X.500 dsa, but something like SLAPD.  Given the amount of traffic on
this list asking about how to make ACL and DNs and such work 'right' with
SLAPD, I think most of them would actually do just as well to get a real
DSA.  One particular failing in SLAPD is the missing functionality of
shadowing, referrals, replication and the like.

s

--
+     +      +      +      +    |    [email-masked]
                                |    Nobody else speaks for me,
       Uh oh, no Boom.          |    and I speak for no one else.
                                |    http://www.uth.tmc.edu/~snewton/
                                |     +     +     +     +     +     +

----- End Included Message -----