Subject: Re: Add and Modify DN Operations in [Protocol]-12

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 12:05:34 -0700

K, I changed add to "The parent of the object and alias entries to be
added MUST exist.". Because there are a number of other DSE types that
could be added without a parent.

For modDN, here's what X.511 says:
"The newSuperior argument, if present, specifies that the entry is to
be moved to a new superior in the DIT. The entry becomes an immediate
subordinate of the entry with the indicated Distinguished Name, which
must be an already existing object entry. The new superior shall not be
the entry itself or any of its subordinates, or an alias, or such that
the moved entry violates any DIT structure rules. It is possible that
entries subordinate to the moved entry may violate the active subschema,
in which case it is the responsibility of the Subschema Administrative
Authority to make subsequent adjustments to these entries to make them
consistent with the subschema, as described in ITU-T Rec. X.501 |
ISO/IEC 9594-2, clause 13."

For now, I'll add the bit about the parent already existing. But... I
guess my point is. There's a ton of stuff like this in X.511. 

Jim

>>> Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]> 1/10/03 12:10:58 AM
>>>
> 4.7. Add Operation 
>   The entry named in the entry field of the AddRequest MUST NOT exist

>   for the AddRequest to succeed. The parent of the entry to be added

>   MUST exist

unless the entry being added is the initial vertex of a naming
context.

Modify DN with newSuperior set should also require that the entry
named
by newSuperior already exists, unless the new entry name is the
initial
vertex of a naming context - which would mean that an entry in one
naming context is moved to become the initial vertex of another naming
context.  Or should that be legal at all?

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:43:29 -0800

>could be added without a parent.

I don't think any major clarification is really needed (but
maybe just a few tweaks).

>unless the entry being added is the initial vertex of a naming

No.  Even if the entry is the initial vertex of a naming context,
its parent (except where the naming context prefix has only one RDN)
should exist in the superior naming context.  However, in this case
where the server doesn't shadow the superior naming context, the
server processing the Add request should not be required to
ensure the parent actually does exist.  Likewise for Modify DN.

Kurt