Refeds


Subject Re: SCHAC OIDs
From Peter Schober <peter.schober@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:25:27 +0200

TL;DR: +1 on what Brook said (in both of his emails).

* Peter Schober <peter.schober@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [2014-10-14 08:21]:
> * Heather Flanagan <hlflanagan@xxxxxxxxx> [2014-10-14 01:18]:
> > If you go to the page that refers to the original IANA assignment,
> > http://www.terena.org/activities/tf-emc2/oid.html, you will see:
> > 
> > The branch 1.3.6.1.4.1.25178.1 is reserved for SCHAC.
> > 
> >     1.3.6.1.4.1.25178.1.1 - Branch for SCHAC LDAP object classes
> >     1.3.6.1.4.1.25178.1.2 - Branch for SCHAC LDAP attributes
> 
> That's also what's in the published schema (maybe someone can check
> older versions of the schema for consistency, but I suspsect this will
> be OK):
> http://www.terena.org/activities/tf-emc2/docs/schac/schac-20110705-1.4.1.schema.txt
> 
> So all is good, no?
> 
> > However, if you go to the URN registry,
> > https://urnreg.terena.org/browser/browser-oid.php?go=1.3.6.1.4.1.25178.1,
> > you will see:
> 
> Well, the registry is wrong, it seems. As simple as that.
> 
> > I don't know why there is this discrepancy, and it seems like several
> > people have implemented the OID structure as registered with IANA.
> 
> Well, only the 1.3.6.1.4.1.25178 is registered with IANA, AFAIU, but
> if you mean people have implemented the published schema (see URL
> above) which is consistent with the oid.html web site above, then it's
> all good, no?
> 
> > Who will actually, not just theoretically, have things break if we
> > make things match the registry?
> 
> Now you've lost me -- why would you want to make things match the
> registry when (1) people likely have implemented what's in the
> published schema (which is correct) and (2) when the registry is wrong?
> 
> > Fascinating question, and hopefully the organizations who have
> > implemented SCHAC are looking at this mailing list
> 
> Jfyi (and not that it matters much): Your email didn't go out to the
> schac mailing list. Maybe that's in the process of being
> decommissioned anyway?
> More importantly we know that academic institutions implementing SCHAC
> in their directory server software for their own use are NOT looking
> at the REFEDS list.
> -peter

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature