-<p>This is a
-<a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Time_for_new__LDAP_schemas_replacing_RFC_2307_.html">followup</a>
-on my
-<a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Idea_for_a_change_to_LDAP_schemas_allowing_DNS_and_DHCP_info_to_be_combined_into_one_object.html">previous
-work</a> on
-<a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Combining_PowerDNS_and_ISC_DHCP_LDAP_objects.html">merging
-all</a> the computer related LDAP objects in Debian Edu.</p>
-
-<p>As a step to try to see if it possible to merge the DNS and DHCP
-LDAP objects, I have had a look at how the packages pdns-backend-ldap
-and dhcp3-server-ldap in Debian use the LDAP server. The two
-implementations are quite different in how they use LDAP.</p>
-
-To get this information, I started slapd with debugging enabled and
-dumped the debug output to a file to get the LDAP searches performed
-on a Debian Edu main-server. Here is a summary.
-
-<p><strong>powerdns</strong></p>
-
-<a href="http://www.linuxnetworks.de/doc/index.php/PowerDNS_LDAP_Backend">Clues
-on how to</a> set up PowerDNS to use a LDAP backend is available on
-the web.
-
-<p>PowerDNS have two modes of operation using LDAP as its backend.
-One "strict" mode where the forward and reverse DNS lookups are done
-using the same LDAP objects, and a "tree" mode where the forward and
-reverse entries are in two different subtrees in LDAP with a structure
-based on the DNS names, as in tjener.intern and
-2.2.0.10.in-addr.arpa.</p>
-
-<p>In tree mode, the server is set up to use a LDAP subtree as its
-base, and uses a "base" scoped search for the DNS name by adding
-"dc=tjener,dc=intern," to the base with a filter for
-"(associateddomain=tjener.intern)" for the forward entry and
-"dc=2,dc=2,dc=0,dc=10,dc=in-addr,dc=arpa," with a filter for
-"(associateddomain=2.2.0.10.in-addr.arpa)" for the reverse entry. For
-forward entries, it is looking for attributes named dnsttl, arecord,
-nsrecord, cnamerecord, soarecord, ptrrecord, hinforecord, mxrecord,
-txtrecord, rprecord, afsdbrecord, keyrecord, aaaarecord, locrecord,
-srvrecord, naptrrecord, kxrecord, certrecord, dsrecord, sshfprecord,
-ipseckeyrecord, rrsigrecord, nsecrecord, dnskeyrecord, dhcidrecord,
-spfrecord and modifytimestamp. For reverse entries it is looking for
-the attributes dnsttl, arecord, nsrecord, cnamerecord, soarecord,
-ptrrecord, hinforecord, mxrecord, txtrecord, rprecord, aaaarecord,
-locrecord, srvrecord, naptrrecord and modifytimestamp. The equivalent
-ldapsearch commands could look like this:</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-ldapsearch -h ldap \
- -b dc=tjener,dc=intern,ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no \
- -s base -x '(associateddomain=tjener.intern)' dNSTTL aRecord nSRecord \
- cNAMERecord sOARecord pTRRecord hInfoRecord mXRecord tXTRecord \
- rPRecord aFSDBRecord KeyRecord aAAARecord lOCRecord sRVRecord \
- nAPTRRecord kXRecord certRecord dSRecord sSHFPRecord iPSecKeyRecord \
- rRSIGRecord nSECRecord dNSKeyRecord dHCIDRecord sPFRecord modifyTimestamp
-
-ldapsearch -h ldap \
- -b dc=2,dc=2,dc=0,dc=10,dc=in-addr,dc=arpa,ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no \
- -s base -x '(associateddomain=2.2.0.10.in-addr.arpa)'
- dnsttl, arecord, nsrecord, cnamerecord soarecord ptrrecord \
- hinforecord mxrecord txtrecord rprecord aaaarecord locrecord \
- srvrecord naptrrecord modifytimestamp
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>In Debian Edu/Lenny, the PowerDNS tree mode is used with
-ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no as the base, and these are two
-example LDAP objects used there. In addition to these objects, the
-parent objects all th way up to ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-also exist.</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-dn: dc=tjener,dc=intern,ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-objectclass: top
-objectclass: dnsdomain
-objectclass: domainrelatedobject
-dc: tjener
-arecord: 10.0.2.2
-associateddomain: tjener.intern
-
-dn: dc=2,dc=2,dc=0,dc=10,dc=in-addr,dc=arpa,ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-objectclass: top
-objectclass: dnsdomain2
-objectclass: domainrelatedobject
-dc: 2
-ptrrecord: tjener.intern
-associateddomain: 2.2.0.10.in-addr.arpa
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>In strict mode, the server behaves differently. When looking for
-forward DNS entries, it is doing a "subtree" scoped search with the
-same base as in the tree mode for a object with filter
-"(associateddomain=tjener.intern)" and requests the attributes dnsttl,
-arecord, nsrecord, cnamerecord, soarecord, ptrrecord, hinforecord,
-mxrecord, txtrecord, rprecord, aaaarecord, locrecord, srvrecord,
-naptrrecord and modifytimestamp. For reverse entires it also do a
-subtree scoped search but this time the filter is "(arecord=10.0.2.2)"
-and the requested attributes are associateddomain, dnsttl and
-modifytimestamp. In short, in strict mode the objects with ptrrecord
-go away, and the arecord attribute in the forward object is used
-instead.</p>
-
-<p>The forward and reverse searches can be simulated using ldapsearch
-like this:</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-ldapsearch -h ldap -b ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no -s sub -x \
- '(associateddomain=tjener.intern)' dNSTTL aRecord nSRecord \
- cNAMERecord sOARecord pTRRecord hInfoRecord mXRecord tXTRecord \
- rPRecord aFSDBRecord KeyRecord aAAARecord lOCRecord sRVRecord \
- nAPTRRecord kXRecord certRecord dSRecord sSHFPRecord iPSecKeyRecord \
- rRSIGRecord nSECRecord dNSKeyRecord dHCIDRecord sPFRecord modifyTimestamp
-
-ldapsearch -h ldap -b ou=hosts,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no -s sub -x \
- '(arecord=10.0.2.2)' associateddomain dnsttl modifytimestamp
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>In addition to the forward and reverse searches , there is also a
-search for SOA records, which behave similar to the forward and
-reverse lookups.</p>
-
-<p>A thing to note with the PowerDNS behaviour is that it do not
-specify any objectclass names, and instead look for the attributes it
-need to generate a DNS reply. This make it able to work with any
-objectclass that provide the needed attributes.</p>
-
-<p>The attributes are normally provided in the cosine (RFC 1274) and
-dnsdomain2 schemas. The latter is used for reverse entries like
-ptrrecord and recent DNS additions like aaaarecord and srvrecord.</p>
-
-<p>In Debian Edu, we have created DNS objects using the object classes
-dcobject (for dc), dnsdomain or dnsdomain2 (structural, for the DNS
-attributes) and domainrelatedobject (for associatedDomain). The use
-of structural object classes make it impossible to combine these
-classes with the object classes used by DHCP.</p>
-
-<p>There are other schemas that could be used too, for example the
-dnszone structural object class used by Gosa and bind-sdb for the DNS
-attributes combined with the domainrelatedobject object class, but in
-this case some unused attributes would have to be included as well
-(zonename and relativedomainname).</p>
-
-<p>My proposal for Debian Edu would be to switch PowerDNS to strict
-mode and not use any of the existing objectclasses (dnsdomain,
-dnsdomain2 and dnszone) when one want to combine the DNS information
-with DHCP information, and instead create a auxiliary object class
-defined something like this (using the attributes defined for
-dnsdomain and dnsdomain2 or dnszone):</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-objectclass ( some-oid NAME 'dnsDomainAux'
- SUP top
- AUXILIARY
- MAY ( ARecord $ MDRecord $ MXRecord $ NSRecord $ SOARecord $ CNAMERecord $
- DNSTTL $ DNSClass $ PTRRecord $ HINFORecord $ MINFORecord $
- TXTRecord $ SIGRecord $ KEYRecord $ AAAARecord $ LOCRecord $
- NXTRecord $ SRVRecord $ NAPTRRecord $ KXRecord $ CERTRecord $
- A6Record $ DNAMERecord
- ))
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>This will allow any object to become a DNS entry when combined with
-the domainrelatedobject object class, and allow any entity to include
-all the attributes PowerDNS wants. I've sent an email to the PowerDNS
-developers asking for their view on this schema and if they are
-interested in providing such schema with PowerDNS, and I hope my
-message will be accepted into their mailing list soon.</p>
-
-<p><strong>ISC dhcp</strong></p>
-
-<p>The DHCP server searches for specific objectclass and requests all
-the object attributes, and then uses the attributes it want. This
-make it harder to figure out exactly what attributes are used, but
-thanks to the working example in Debian Edu I can at least get an idea
-what is needed without having to read the source code.</p>
-
-<p>In the DHCP server configuration, the LDAP base to use and the
-search filter to use to locate the correct dhcpServer entity is
-stored. These are the relevant entries from
-/etc/dhcp3/dhcpd.conf:</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-ldap-base-dn "dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no";
-ldap-dhcp-server-cn "dhcp";
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>The DHCP server uses this information to nest all the DHCP
-configuration it need. The cn "dhcp" is located using the given LDAP
-base and the filter "(&(objectClass=dhcpServer)(cn=dhcp))". The
-search result is this entry:</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-dn: cn=dhcp,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-cn: dhcp
-objectClass: top
-objectClass: dhcpServer
-dhcpServiceDN: cn=DHCP Config,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>The content of the dhcpServiceDN attribute is next used to locate the
-subtree with DHCP configuration. The DHCP configuration subtree base
-is located using a base scope search with base "cn=DHCP
-Config,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no" and filter
-"(&(objectClass=dhcpService)(|(dhcpPrimaryDN=cn=dhcp,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no)(dhcpSecondaryDN=cn=dhcp,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no)))".
-The search result is this entry:</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-dn: cn=DHCP Config,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-cn: DHCP Config
-objectClass: top
-objectClass: dhcpService
-objectClass: dhcpOptions
-dhcpPrimaryDN: cn=dhcp, dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-dhcpStatements: ddns-update-style none
-dhcpStatements: authoritative
-dhcpOption: smtp-server code 69 = array of ip-address
-dhcpOption: www-server code 72 = array of ip-address
-dhcpOption: wpad-url code 252 = text
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>Next, the entire subtree is processed, one level at the time. When
-all the DHCP configuration is loaded, it is ready to receive requests.
-The subtree in Debian Edu contain objects with object classes
-top/dhcpService/dhcpOptions, top/dhcpSharedNetwork/dhcpOptions,
-top/dhcpSubnet, top/dhcpGroup and top/dhcpHost. These provide options
-and information about netmasks, dynamic range etc. Leaving out the
-details here because it is not relevant for the focus of my
-investigation, which is to see if it is possible to merge dns and dhcp
-related computer objects.</p>
-
-<p>When a DHCP request come in, LDAP is searched for the MAC address
-of the client (00:00:00:00:00:00 in this example), using a subtree
-scoped search with "cn=DHCP Config,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no" as
-the base and "(&(objectClass=dhcpHost)(dhcpHWAddress=ethernet
-00:00:00:00:00:00))" as the filter. This is what a host object look
-like:</p>
-
-<blockquote><pre>
-dn: cn=hostname,cn=group1,cn=THINCLIENTS,cn=DHCP Config,dc=skole,dc=skolelinux,dc=no
-cn: hostname
-objectClass: top
-objectClass: dhcpHost
-dhcpHWAddress: ethernet 00:00:00:00:00:00
-dhcpStatements: fixed-address hostname
-</pre></blockquote>
-
-<p>There is less flexiblity in the way LDAP searches are done here.
-The object classes need to have fixed names, and the configuration
-need to be stored in a fairly specific LDAP structure. On the
-positive side, the invidiual dhcpHost entires can be anywhere without
-the DN pointed to by the dhcpServer entries. The latter should make
-it possible to group all host entries in a subtree next to the
-configuration entries, and this subtree can also be shared with the
-DNS server if the schema proposed above is combined with the dhcpHost
-structural object class.
+<p>A few days ago
+<a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article189879.ece">an
+article</a> in the Norwegian Computerworld magazine about how version
+2.0 of
+<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Interoperability_Framework">European
+Interoperability Framework</a> has been successfully lobbied by the
+proprietary software industry to remove the focus on free software.
+Nothing very surprising there, given
+<a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/29/2115235/Open-Source-Open-Standards-Under-Attack-In-Europe">earlier
+reports</a> on how Microsoft and others have stacked the committees in
+this work. But I find this very sad. The definition of
+<a href="http://www.nuug.no/dokumenter/standard-presse-def-200506.txt">an
+open standard from version 1</a> was very good, and something I
+believe should be used also in the future, alongside
+<a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">the
+definition from Digistan</A>. Version 2 have removed the open
+standard definition from its content.</p>
+
+<p>Anyway, the news reminded me of the great reply sent by Dr. Edgar
+Villanueva, congressman in Peru at the time, to Microsoft as a reply
+to Microsofts attack on his proposal regarding the use of free software
+in the public sector in Peru. As the text was not available from a
+few of the URLs where it used to be available, I copy it here from
+<a href="http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/articles/en/reponseperou/villanueva_to_ms.html">my
+source</a> to ensure it is available also in the future. Some
+background information about that story is available in
+<a href="http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6099">an article</a> from
+Linux Journal in 2002.</p>
+
+<blockquote>
+<p>Lima, 8th of April, 2002<br>
+To: Señor JUAN ALBERTO GONZÁLEZ<br>
+General Manager of Microsoft Perú</p>
+
+<p>Dear Sir:</p>
+
+<p>First of all, I thank you for your letter of March 25, 2002 in which you state the official position of Microsoft relative to Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration, which is indubitably inspired by the desire for Peru to find a suitable place in the global technological context. In the same spirit, and convinced that we will find the best solutions through an exchange of clear and open ideas, I will take this opportunity to reply to the commentaries included in your letter.</p>
+
+<p>While acknowledging that opinions such as yours constitute a significant contribution, it would have been even more worthwhile for me if, rather than formulating objections of a general nature (which we will analyze in detail later) you had gathered solid arguments for the advantages that proprietary software could bring to the Peruvian State, and to its citizens in general, since this would have allowed a more enlightening exchange in respect of each of our positions.</p>
+
+<p>With the aim of creating an orderly debate, we will assume that what you call "open source software" is what the Bill defines as "free software", since there exists software for which the source code is distributed together with the program, but which does not fall within the definition established by the Bill; and that what you call "commercial software" is what the Bill defines as "proprietary" or "unfree", given that there exists free software which is sold in the market for a price like any other good or service.</p>
+
+<p>It is also necessary to make it clear that the aim of the Bill we are discussing is not directly related to the amount of direct savings that can by made by using free software in state institutions. That is in any case a marginal aggregate value, but in no way is it the chief focus of the Bill. The basic principles which inspire the Bill are linked to the basic guarantees of a state of law, such as:</p>
+
+<p>
+<ul>
+<li>Free access to public information by the citizen. </li>
+<li>Permanence of public data. </li>
+<li>Security of the State and citizens.</li>
+</ul>
+</p>