[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: extensible match quirks for Active Directory
At 02:22 AM 10/20/2005, Ralf Haferkamp wrote:
>we recently found out that some versions of Active Directory don't
>accept some extensible matching filters.
Old AD installs should be updated. I believe MS has provided a fix
for this problem. If not or the fix flawed, folks should complain
to MS as the LDAP TS is quite clear that default values of BOOLEAN
valued fields are absent in conformant PDU encodings (per
Section 5.1(4) of RFC 2251).
>(Newer Versions seem to work correctly.)
>The problem is that AD seems to be unable to decode the extensible
>match, when the "dnAttributes" field is missing in the request (which
>means it's using the default value "false"). Explicitly adding the
>boolean (with a false value) to the request makes AD work as expected.
>Would you accept the addition of a workaround for this problem to
>libldap (something that can be switched on by some ldap_set_option()
You mean, something like:
In general, I am opposed to adding such an option as it
would, in all likelihood, be enabled unconditionally, leading
to significantly more non-conformant LDAP implementations in
the wild. It would be counter to the old Internet
interoperability guideline "be liberal in what you accept,
be conservative in what you send" in implementing protocols,
as well as erode the value of standardized LDAP specifications.