On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, John Powell wrote:
Actually, from what I understand the current Mitel implementation
already violates the schema (note: I am not an LDAP expert) as they
have only defined entries as person and the current fields require
organizationalPerson and inetOrgPerson to be
Craig Foster wrote:
- Wouldn't a LDAP schema change be better?
Adding fields requires an additional line in the schema, and
additional
lines in whatever is reading or writing that particular record.
It would be a good idea to forward the schema and changes to Mitel,
as the
mobile field
Wouldn't a LDAP schema change be better?
Adding fields requires an additional line in the schema, and additional
lines in whatever is reading or writing that particular record.
It would be a good idea to forward the schema and changes to Mitel, as the
mobile field is a rather important peice of
