At 09:19 AM 11/24/2006, Howard Chu wrote: >Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote: >>At 02:05 PM 11/23/2006, Howard Chu wrote: >>>ldapmodify will accept multiple modifications without a separator in between >>>them. E.g.: >>> >>>dn: dc=example,dc=com >>>changetype: modify >>>add: cn >>>cn: foo >>>sn: bar >>>description: xyzzy >>While the above may adhere to the ABNF, it's nonsense. The >>changetype is modify, so we're representing a modifyRequest. >>The modify request contains a single add operation of cn. Hence, >>any provided values must be of cn. The second and third values >>are not of cn. That's an error. >>While some parsers might be liberal in handling this error, >>implicitly inserting additional add operations, that behavior >>is something authors of LDIF files should not rely on. There >>certainly are parsers that, quite properly, error on such >>LDIF input. >>RFC 2849 could do with some clarification. The intent was >>to create a one-to-one mapping between LDIF change records >>and LDAP update requests. > >That's what I figured, but that's clearly not what it does. The code also >collapses some things together, which definitely doesn't create a one-to-one >mapping.
In some cases, the parser can be said to liberal in what it accepts. In some cases, the parser is simply broken. Kurt
