[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cifs-protocol
Subject:    Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110040646791367] : RE: Numerical value of
From:       Hongwei Sun <hongweis () microsoft ! com>
Date:       2010-04-07 15:18:16
Message-ID: 46046D41E7DB1946A5A12B7845D977BF368F13C4 () TK5EX14MBXC125 ! redmond ! corp ! microsoft ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi, Nadya,

  I am glad that you got the information you need. 

  For this specific bit (0x00000002),when used on an attributeSchema object, it \
specifies that the attribute is a member of a partial attribute set (PAS). If used on \
a crossRef object, it specifies that the NC is a domain naming context (domain NC).  

Thanks!

Hongwei

-----Original Message-----
From: Nadezhda Ivanova [mailto:nadezhda.ivanova@postpath.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 5:59 AM
To: lukeh@padl.com
Cc: Hongwei Sun; Interoperability Documentation Help; cifs-protocol@samba.org
Subject: Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110040646791367] : RE: Numerical value of \
FLAG_ATTR_REQ_PARTIAL_SET_MEMBER

I think you are right, but it is still a bit confusing. Anyway, I finally got it :).

----- Original Message -----
> From: Luke Howard <lukeh@padl.com>
> To: Nadezhda Ivanova <nadezhda.ivanova@postpath.com>
> Cc: hongweis@microsoft.com <hongweis@microsoft.com>, dochelp@winse.microsoft.com \
>                 <dochelp@winse.microsoft.com>, cifs-protocol@samba.org \
>                 <cifs-protocol@samba.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2010 1:19:03 PM (GMT+02:00) Helsinki, Kyiv, Riga, Sofia, \
>                 Tallinn, Vilnius
> Subject: Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110040646791367] : RE: Numerical value of \
> FLAG_ATTR_REQ_PARTIAL_SET_MEMBER

> > On 07/04/2010, at 11:02 AM, Nadezhda Ivanova wrote:
> 
> > Hi Hongwei,
> > Thanks a lot! I suppose I got confused because 2.2.10 states:
> > PS (FLAG_ATTR_REQ_PARTIAL_SET_MEMBER or FLAG_CR_NTDS_DOMAIN, 
> 0x00000002)
> > I was not sure if both flags have the same value, or the value is 
> just for FLAG_CR_NTDS_DOMAIN.
> 
> My understanding is that the flag meaning depends on the context (ie. 
> the object class). So the same values may have completely different 
> meanings for different classes.
> 
> -- Luke

_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
cifs-protocol@cifs.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]