Bug 694887 - RFE: Addition of FedFS schema LDIF
Summary: RFE: Addition of FedFS schema LDIF
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CANTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: openldap
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: All
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jan Vcelak
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-04-08 18:29 UTC by Chuck Lever
Modified: 2013-03-04 01:28 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-04-12 16:03:28 UTC
Type: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Chuck Lever 2011-04-08 18:29:55 UTC
I'd like to request the addition of the FedFS schema described in this draft:

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-protocol-11

as part of the repertoire of schemas that are installed by default for new
servers.  An overview of FedFS can be found here:

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5716

Can this be added in the upstream OpenLDAP distribution as well?

Comment 1 Chuck Lever 2011-04-08 18:34:38 UTC
Equivalent request for 389-ds: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694652

Comment 2 Chuck Lever 2011-04-08 18:59:51 UTC
I've posted an LDIF containing the FedFS NSDB schema in draft 11 here:

  http://oss.oracle.com/projects/fedfs-utils/dist/files/91fedfs.ldif

This contains the correct IETF boilerplate.  The schema is extracted verbatim from draft 11.

I believe the NSDB protocol draft is in last call, so we don't expect any significant changes to this schema.  My (weak) preference is that this file be added verbatim to the Fedora openldap package as installed, and hopefully upstream as well.

Comment 3 Jan Vcelak 2011-04-09 12:29:15 UTC
Hi Chuck,

I suggest creating upstream issue on http://www.openldap.org/its/. If the schema is included upstream (at least into VCS), I will add it into Fedora as well. But I do not want to include any schema without upstream acceptance.

If you need some help with creating the request, feel free to ask me. I can do it. And, please, post upstream issue number to this bugzilla. So I can track the progress.

Thank you.

Jan

Comment 4 Chuck Lever 2011-04-11 15:35:32 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> I suggest creating upstream issue on http://www.openldap.org/its/. If the
> schema is included upstream (at least into VCS), I will add it into Fedora as
> well. But I do not want to include any schema without upstream acceptance.
> 
> If you need some help with creating the request, feel free to ask me. I can do
> it. And, please, post upstream issue number to this bugzilla. So I can track
> the progress.

I'm happy to let you open a request on www.openldap.org/its, and I can add detail there if needed.  I understand that this is a pre-requisite for FedFS schema support in Fedora's version of OpenLDAP.

Comment 5 Jan Vcelak 2012-04-12 16:03:28 UTC
This has to be resolved upstream.

Comment 6 Chuck Lever 2012-04-16 15:55:32 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> This has to be resolved upstream.

Did I misunderstand what you meant by "help you create the request" ?  I thought Red Hat could and would make the necessary upstream request.

Comment 7 Rich Megginson 2012-04-16 16:12:30 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > This has to be resolved upstream.
> 
> Did I misunderstand what you meant by "help you create the request" ?  I
> thought Red Hat could and would make the necessary upstream request.

For openldap, please open an ITS in the openldap issue tracking system:
http://www.openldap.org/its/

Comment 8 Chuck Lever 2012-04-16 16:25:52 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > (In reply to comment #5)
> > > This has to be resolved upstream.
> > 
> > Did I misunderstand what you meant by "help you create the request" ?  I
> > thought Red Hat could and would make the necessary upstream request.
> 
> For openldap, please open an ITS in the openldap issue tracking system:
> http://www.openldap.org/its/

(ITS#7246)


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.