RE: LCUP Issue: UUID

"Liben, Michael (GTS)" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ldup
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I don't think specifying a UUID algorithm is necessary. If the durn thing is universally unique--as its name implies--then specifying the algorithm should be irrelevant. 

Specifying a 'well-defined sting representation' would be exremely useful.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Legg [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 2:31 AM
To: 'John McMeeking'; [email protected]
Subject: RE: LCUP Issue: UUID



John,

John McMeeking wrote:
> I think that some reasonable uses of the attribute warrant a string
> representation.  For example, an application may want to search for an
> entry with a specific entryuuid.  And some LDUP conflict resolution
> procedures call for renaming an entry to have a DN like 
> "cn=some value +
> entryuuid=xxxx".  Constructing such search filters and DNs is 
> much cleaner
> if entryuuid has a string syntax.

I agree.

> Granted, a well-written application
> should be able to construct search filters and DNs containing binary
> values.  Case ignore match may be too restrictive.

The allComponentsMatch matching rule, already referenced by URP,
performs a character by character code-point comparison when applied
to a string type (there are some caveats on DirectoryString).
This avoids all the letter case, white-space and other normalization
that comes with caseIgnoreMatch and caseExactMatch.

> Certainly, there is no
> reason why an application can't use the entry uuid in the 
> case provided by
> the originating server.
> 
> That aside, don't we have to define what an entry uuid looks 
> like?

Yes.

> A maximum size would probably be helpful to 
> server vendors so
> as to not have to provide a search and storage mechanism (DB table for
> example) that has to support arbirary length values generated by other
> servers.

Speaking as a vendor, I already support arbitrary length attribute values.
A maximum size for entry uuids would be an irritation rather than an
advantage to me.

> Just to get things started, I propose that we use the DCE 
> UUID algorithms,
> which have a well defined string representation.  And we 
> should be able to
> define a entryuuid syntax with a string representation, which 
> is probably a
> bit cleaner than using "directory string" or "octet string."

What character set does the DCE algorithm use ? Would PrintableString
or IA5String be sufficient ? Otherwise we can just define an LDAP syntax
OID for UTF8String.

Regards,
Steven
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.