Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Tue Oct 3 17:45:16 GMT 2006
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 11:46:23AM -0400, simo wrote:
> So if current design is ok, I'd propose to write down the new IDmap
> implementation so that it is equivalent with the current behavior and
> then when we are ok with it, discuss a bit further and eventually change
> the allocation rules to do implement the unified Unix ID mapping and
> change other code accordingly.
What about the following idea: ID mapping from its generic
task does not have anything to do with ID allocation.
Proposal: Why don't we have two separate module interfaces,
one for id mapping and another one for allocation. idmap_tdb
and idmap_ldap would support the set_mapping call, whereas
idmap_ad and others would not. Separate from this question
is the task to allocate new ids. I could imagine setups
where this would give additional flexibility. And then we
have less pain later when we want to switch to a 'allocate
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20061003/727518a3/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical