Re: [389-devel] DN normalisation design document

2010-03-17 Thread Noriko Hosoi

On 03/17/2010 01:13 PM, Andrey Ivanov wrote:



In order to support "Old DN format including DN in the double
quotes" another cn=config switch may be necessary. It seems there
was recently a new switch introduced to make the dn syntax
validation a little more "relaxed" - nsslapd-dn-validate-strict.
Maybe this one could be used to allow for DNs with double-quoted
values?

Actually, the way how we are going to handle the old style 'dn:
="",' is converting the old style to a
new style in the normalization when the server receives DNs from
clients and the converted new style DN is used in the rest of the
process.  The nsslapd-dn-validate-strict value is examined in the
DN syntax validation code for now.  Unless we change it, the DN
syntax validation code always receives the new DN style.

Ok. What i wanted to say is that we should avoid any new config 
parameters in cn=config. The way you propose to handle the problem is 
the best one - it is completely transparent to the user, the server 
back-end "sees" only the normalised DNs so it does not complain and no 
additional configuration

parameters are necessary.

That being said, are you suggesting if nsslapd-dn-validate-strict
is on, we should not convert an old style DN to a new style? 
That'd be really strict.  I'm leaning toward to the other side

accepting the both old and new style with no restriction.  Do you
see any disadvantages in allowing the old style?

No, absolutely not, i agree completely with your reasoning. The code 
should be strict but not completely rigid :) Taking care of the 
"legacy" presentation in a transparent manner is the ideal solution.



Thanks so much for the confirmation, Andrey.  I'm working on the issue 
based on the design...

--noriko


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

Re: [389-devel] DN normalisation design document

2010-03-17 Thread Andrey Ivanov
>
> In order to support "Old DN format including DN in the double quotes"
> another cn=config switch may be necessary. It seems there was recently a new
> switch introduced to make the dn syntax validation a little more "relaxed" -
> nsslapd-dn-validate-strict. Maybe this one could be used to allow for DNs
> with double-quoted values?
>
> Actually, the way how we are going to handle the old style 'dn:
> ="",' is converting the old style to a new style
> in the normalization when the server receives DNs from clients and the
> converted new style DN is used in the rest of the process.  The
> nsslapd-dn-validate-strict value is examined in the DN syntax validation
> code for now.  Unless we change it, the DN syntax validation code always
> receives the new DN style.
>
> Ok. What i wanted to say is that we should avoid any new config parameters
in cn=config. The way you propose to handle the problem is the best one - it
is completely transparent to the user, the server back-end "sees" only the
normalised DNs so it does not complain and no additional configuration
parameters are necessary.

That being said, are you suggesting if nsslapd-dn-validate-strict is on, we
> should not convert an old style DN to a new style?  That'd be really
> strict.  I'm leaning toward to the other side accepting the both old and new
> style with no restriction.  Do you see any disadvantages in allowing the old
> style?
>
No, absolutely not, i agree completely with your reasoning. The code should
be strict but not completely rigid :) Taking care of the "legacy"
presentation in a transparent manner is the ideal solution.
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

[389-devel] DN normalisation design document

2010-03-17 Thread Andrey Ivanov
Hi Noriko,

i've read the design document
http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_to_New_DN_Format

In order to support "Old DN format including DN in the double quotes"
another cn=config switch may be necessary. It seems there was recently a new
switch introduced to make the dn syntax validation a little more "relaxed" -
nsslapd-dn-validate-strict. Maybe this one could be used to allow for DNs
with double-quoted values?

Here is the commit comment for that parameter :

commit 0410819d48795fca4faf986cf8658c34c4d929e3
Author: Nathan Kinder 
Date:   Wed May 13 11:12:11 2009 -0700

Add strict DN syntax enforcement option.

The DN syntax has become more restrictive over time, and the
current rules are quite strict. Strict adherence to the rules
defined in RFC 4514, section 3, would likely cause some pain to
client applications. Things such as spaces between the RDN
components are not allowed, yet many people use them still since
they were allowed in the previous specification outlined in RFC
1779.

To deal with the special circumstances around validation of the DN
syntax, a configuration attribute is provided named
nsslapd-dn-validate-strict. This configuration attribute will
ensure that the value strictly adheres to the rules defined in RFC
4514, section 3 if it is set to on. If it is set to off, the server
will normalize the value before checking it for syntax violations.
Our current normalization function was designed to handle DN values
adhering to RFC 1779 or RFC 2253

Concerning the logic of escaping/unescaping/normalisation we could test how
openldap behaves in each case (as you've made it in "DN HEX HEX" bug).

For upgrades/migrations and double quotes in DNs: the two values may be left
during the upgrade (just in case someone uses them as-is) and then an
optional validation/cleaning script could be provided separately? The
sensitive part here is the whole o-NetscapeRoot tree: console using and
writing this type of values, replication agreement/management etc

As for the "related bugs" section i think another bug should be added  (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199923), it concernes the same
RFC4514 compliance.
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel