[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: use-case for clientctrls?
- To: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>, openldap-technical@openldap.org
- Subject: Re: use-case for clientctrls?
- From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 17:46:56 +0000
- In-reply-to: <WM!a42cbb49be7493191c8c6cae9156fe2b9745ec8b2e1b3329c8200f16cc2934c9aebd8433a24f1cfc49b7322207d657ad!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com>
- References: <21cd91d5-8720-3b66-0690-9874459afe45@stroeder.com> <WM!a42cbb49be7493191c8c6cae9156fe2b9745ec8b2e1b3329c8200f16cc2934c9aebd8433a24f1cfc49b7322207d657ad!@mailstronghold-2.zmailcloud.com>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:56.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/56.0 SeaMonkey/2.53a1
Michael Ströder wrote:
After so many years passing around parameter clientctrls (e.g. in a
wrapper module) I'm still wondering which use-cases this argument is
meant for.
I only found [1] but this seems akward today anyway.
Agreed, OID-based controls for client-side library behavior seems rather
unwieldy. I would agree though, that per-request control of library behavior
is a good thing. The C API still has no ldap_search() parameter for alias
deref behavior. It's a bit ridiculous that it's a library-level option, since
the option only has relevance to search requests.
Any more client controls?
Ciao, Michael.
[1]
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-c-api-05#section-11.3.1
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/