The challenge I see here is that I really do need an additional syntax
in OpenLDAP. If I map this to just a binary string (as I do now),
then
the rename will not follow though. If I map it to a DN (as I had
tried
in the past), then the syntax is invalid. Is it entirely unreasonable
to add an additional syntax?
Well, they are really new syntaxes, so you should add a new syntax.
Or at least a syntax that looks like { type, blob, DN } upon which you
can implement the AD syntaxes (that's kind of what I did for
eDirectory).
-- Luke
--
Fedora-directory-devel mailing list
Fedora-directory-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel
