In playing with Net::LDAP::Util it became apparent that it is not compliant with RFC4514, but instead complies with the older RFC2253. Specifically where #'s in DNs are concerned. Currently it's expecting # followed by hex digits. This may not be the case once RFC4514 LDIF is in use.
The above is not legal with RFC2253, but it is legal with RFC4514.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
On Wednesday, 19. September 2012, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> In playing with Net::LDAP::Util it became apparent that it is not compliant
> with RFC4514, but instead complies with the older RFC2253. Specifically
> where #'s in DNs are concerned. Currently it's expecting # followed by hex
> digits. This may not be the case once RFC4514 LDIF is in use.
> An example DN that it does not handle correctly:
> On Wednesday, 19. September 2012, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
>> In playing with Net::LDAP::Util it became apparent that it is not
>> compliant with RFC4514, but instead complies with the older RFC2253.
>> Specifically where #'s in DNs are concerned. Currently it's expecting #
>> followed by hex digits. This may not be the case once RFC4514 LDIF is
>> in use.
>> An example DN that it does not handle correctly:
>> The above is not legal with RFC2253, but it is legal with RFC4514.
> You may have a look at the commit
> https://github.com/marschap/perl- > ldap/commit/125632a514120ee72912e5fc5b5dd5d1e9c76075
> which tries to fix the issue.
> The updated ldap_explode_dn() should be more strictly conforming to
> the RFCs.
> (It is not release ready, because the test files arenot updated yet)
> Another issue was found in escape_dn_value() which got fixed in
> https://github.com/marschap/perl- > ldap/commit/11ea6b176a0e728d10cc3219cbb84fd8018df5a6
> Feedback is very welcome
Thanks Peter! Should I look at this or perl-ldap 0.48? ;)
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
On Thursday, 20. September 2012, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:34 AM +0200 Peter Marschall
> > Feedback is very welcome
> Thanks Peter! Should I look at this or perl-ldap 0.48? ;)
At this _and_ perl-ldap 0.48 ;-)
These changes are not part of a release yet.
I am hoping for feedback on the patches, and info from the
openldap mailing list (Kurt co-authored th RFCs) whether my
interpretation of the RFCs is correct.
On Wednesday, 19. September 2012, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> In playing with Net::LDAP::Util it became apparent that it is not compliant
> with RFC4514, but instead complies with the older RFC2253. Specifically
> where #'s in DNs are concerned. Currently it's expecting # followed by hex
> digits. This may not be the case once RFC4514 LDIF is in use.
> An example DN that it does not handle correctly:
This alternative tries to adhere to Postel's law, "be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others".
Pro's:
- no additional option (like 'rfc2253') necessary
- should not break existing code that relied on some RFC 2253 peculiarities
(at least, the probability to do so is much lower)
- higher compatibilitiy to openLDAP's slapdn than the other alternative
Con's:
- might accept DN's that are not conforming to any of the RFCs
(but canonical_dn will make them confiorming to both)
