At 23:05 2001-08-07, Dan Melomedman wrote:
>There are a preset number of object classes that define allowed standard
>attributes for entries. Among those more commonly used are
>organizationalPerson, organization, inetOrgPerson (this one might still
>be in draft). These are defined as Internet standards, and "mail" is
>one of the allowed attributes. In my opinion keeping your directory as
>close to the standard as possible is a good idea. Many LDAP-aware
>services expect standardized schema in your directory.
>
>That said, I wonder if qmail-ldap auxiliary class could be approximated
>a little closer to some standard classes, or is it impossible? Imagine
>if there's an attribute in the standard schema for e-mail aliases, and
>some application other than qmail-ldap needs it.
mailalternateaddress was around before qmail-ldap. It was originally
introduced in Netscape's mail schemas, but was later picked up by the work
done in the IETF LASER working group.
It's as close to a standard ldap attribute for mail aliases as you can come.
Or at least it used to be...
The original Lachman-draft that was the base for the LASER discussions was
updated in January this year, and the whole mail/mailalternateaddress use
was thrown out:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lachman-laser-ldap-mail-routing-02.txt
In the new version, mail is just an informative attribute for white pages
type of lookups, and all functional addresses should be in
mailLocalAddress. mailalternateaddress has been dropped completely.
You might want to check out the most recent messages on the Laser list for
some opinions on the new draft:
http://playground.sun.com/laser/#end
Patrik
