Hi, RFC 2255 describes URL extensions like bindname and x-foo. RFC 4516 only shows a hypothetical example with e- extension. Part A1 of RFC 4516 says that bindname had been removed due to lack of known implementations. sdb-ldap from Stig Venaas is such an implementation. Now my question: is OpenLDAP-2.4 still honoring bindname and x-bindpw extensions?
-Dieter
Dieter Kluenter wrote:
RFC 2255 describes URL extensions like bindname and x-foo. RFC 4516 only shows a hypothetical example with e- extension. Part A1 of RFC 4516 says that bindname had been removed due to lack of known implementations.
More discussion:
http://www.openldap.org/lists/ietf-ldapbis/200404/msg00070.html
sdb-ldap from Stig Venaas is such an implementation.
And also web2ldap supports bindname extension (and X-BINDPW but which is not recommended to be use in your bookmarks for anything serious)...
Now my question: is OpenLDAP-2.4 still honoring bindname and x-bindpw extensions?
Did OpenLDAP ever implement it? And for which purpose?
Ciao, Michael.
openldap-software@openldap.org
-
Dieter Kluenter -
Michael Ströder