[389-users] Keep the schema or change it?

[Gary Algier]

Hi,

I am in the process of migrating from Sun's DS 5.2 to DS 389 and I have 
compared the schemata.  I see some differences and I wonder as to the best way 
to handle them.  In general is it better to change the 389 schema and then 
always have to "fix" it with each new release or change my Sun clients somehow 
(this seems to border on the philosophical)?

As an example, there is the Automount schema.  On Sun's systems, they expect 
something schema like this:
objectClasses: ( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.17 NAME 'automount' MUST ( automountKey $ 
automountInformation ) MAY description ...)
with the 389 schema looking like this:
objectclasses: ( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.17 NAME 'automount' MUST ( cn $ 
automountInformation ) MAY description ...)

In other words, the lookup key matched against the user's login for home 
directories would be "automountKey" for Sun, and "cn" for 389.

I notice that my Linux clients work fine with a Sun DS so they seem to be 
using "automountKey".  (Or are they looking for either?).

I also see differences in the objectClass automountMap.  Linux does not seem 
to work with a Sun-style autmountMap.

If I just dump my Sun DS and load it into the 389 DS do I want to overwrite 
the schema?  Should I only load the non-conflicting entries?  If the 389 
schema is the "right" schema, will Linux stop working some day when they 
conform?  Is there a way to have both?

I have about 500 mixed Sun and Linux clients and I want to minimize the 
reconfiguration on the day that I switch DS.

-- 
Gary Algier, WB2FWZ          gaa at ulticom.com             [phone]
Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054      Fax:[phone]

Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals:
     People don't read documentation voluntarily.