Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!RHINO.NCSL.NIST.GOV!tebbutt
From: tebbutt@RHINO.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Tebbutt)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
Subject: X500: Does alias have to point to an existing entry?
Message-ID: <8909141603.AA09230@rhino.ncsl.nist.gov>
Date: 14 Sep 89 16:03:05 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Lines: 35


Hans,

You are absolutely correct. Section 11.1.2.2 of ISO IS 9594/3 (actually
the unofficial CCITT X.511) states, with regard to the Add Entry
Operation :

"Where the entry being created is an alias, no check is made to ensure
that the aliasedObjectName attribute points to a valid entry."

In Section 11.2 of 9594/3 (Remove Entry), no mention is made of any
course of action to be taken with regard to alias entries pointing to
an object which is to be removed. There is an obvious implication here
that the Directory leaves such aliases in place unless directed to do
otherwise by the user. Thus, such aliases would remain in place, and
they would point to a non-existent entry.

In addition, as you rightly point out, the Standard makes provision for
the case where an alias points to no object. Section 12.5.2.1 b) of
9594/3, states that in the case where an alias has been dereferenced
which names no object, a Name Error with value aliasProblem should be
returned.


All the best,



    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    John Tebbutt				tebbutt@rhino.ncsl.nist.gov
    U.S. Department of Commerce
    National Institute of Standards and Technology

    NIST Phase II Directory Prototype Implementation