[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#7246) Addition of FedFS schema LDIF
Howard Chu wrote:
> Michael Ströder wrote:
>> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>>> 126.96.36.199 fedfsFsn
>>> IMO name/port should just be an LDAP URL. Also your definition provides
>>> absolutely zero information of how the LDAP server should be contacted (e.g.
>>> using ldaps or StartTLS) which both can be encoded in an LDAP URL.
>> Which standard describes how to mandate use of StartTLS with a LDAP URL?
>> OpenLDAP has its own extension key-word "StartTLS" and I'm also using it with
>> web2ldap. But AFAIK this is not defined in any standard which could be
>> referenced in a RFC.
> True but irrelevant. The point is that standardizing on a URL syntax today
> future-proofs a spec and allows it to handle new connection mechanisms that
> may appear in the future. Host/port is inextricably tied to networking in the
I did not want to endorse the use of host/port.
I just wanted to point out that one cannot specify the use of StartTLS by LDAP
URL in a standard way. Of course nothing prevents somebody to add custom
extension to LDAP URLs.