[ppml] Directory Services - Take 2
andy at hxr.us
Mon Jun 13 11:34:15 EDT 2005
On Jun 13, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote:
>>> I'm suggesting that ARIN map it's existing backend database into
>>> an LDAP schema
>> This is much easier said than done. By its very nature of being
>> rooted in X.500 DAP and the X.500 tree structure, LDAP imposes a
>> hierarchical tree structure on any data model. Trying to take a
>> highly relational data set and putting into a tree causes many nodes
>> to be replicated (leading to bloat due to multiple copies of the same
> This may be so, but we don't have this problem. IP address
> allocation inherently follows a hierarchical model so the
> problem of bloat arises when you try to cram it into a flat
> relational model.
First, there are more objects in the ARIN database than just IP
addresses. Things like contacts and organizations with multiple
relationships make for a relational model. Second, IP addresses
present a particular issue. Do you base the DIT on an IP classful
hierarchy? Doing it on bit boundaries leads to DNs longer than my arm
for v4... what about v6? What about assignments with the same
starting and/or ending address? If IP addresses are opaque to the
DIT, that means you aren't using the DIT which begs the question of
why you are using LDAP. This problem is far more complex than you
are painting it.
On Jun 13, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote:
>> If you think that an XML presentation format would work with
>> an LDAP approach, I'd suggest documenting this and presenting
>> it for review of the CRISP WG.
> I'm not interested in the views of the CRISP WG.
Why? Both the IRIS and FIRS proposals took into consideration IP
address registries from day one.
More information about the ARIN-PPML