> -----Original Message----- > From: fedora-directory-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf > Of Sam Tran > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 12:40 PM > To: General discussion list for the Fedora Directory server project. > Subject: Re: Virtual DIT views vs > hierarchical DIT > > On 6/24/05, Jeff Clowser <jclowser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Pete Rowley wrote: > > >D) Entry DN's are not disguised, that is views does not > try to make > > >the entry DN of the returned entries look like they > physically exist > > >in the view hiearchy. It is possible that this might fool some > > >clients that do DN manipulation - most won't care however. > > > > > > > > I think this matters most for apps that modify the directory - esp > > those that try to create entries. If they try to modify it > using the > > virtual view, things could get ugly. FWIW, chaining and/or > referrals > > can run into similar issues - if you have one hierarchy and use > > referrals or chaining to split that across servers, you're > generally > > ok, but if you use referrals/chaining to "remap" some > branch/tree to > > some other structure or place in the tree (or another > tree), you start > > getting into trouble. Which sounds like a nice enhancement, redirect non-view entry creation to some other part of the dit :) I think it is only the creation case that really matters - clients that just do modify ops are much more likely to use the dn of the returned entry than to try to construct one (apps that do that would be very broken in any case). -- Fedora-directory-users mailing list Fedora-directory-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
