From api-return-200-apmail-directory-api-archive=directory.apache.org@directory.apache.org Sat Sep 04 21:37:29 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-api-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 67151 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2010 21:37:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 4 Sep 2010 21:37:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 69083 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2010 21:37:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-api-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 69062 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2010 21:37:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact api-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: api@directory.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list api@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 69054 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2010 21:37:28 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Sep 2010 21:37:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.44 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.44] (HELO mail-ww0-f44.google.com) (74.125.82.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Sep 2010 21:37:05 +0000 Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so4530329wwj.1 for ; Sat, 04 Sep 2010 14:36:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ejplNjjFu6mTL9u3CRrsZxoPplbYPjZs9KHPCcv+wh0=; b=BOWdia6hdLU6Nh7lc+Vyp28C6PdQ7mnKb0WvsyUpIzjd/lsaTQivFHbf+PBtBqocg3 q0S5qyBHodWwWCFbviVsqb2Ako4Iz87FTJVtrc5XkvlzEPGtpljPZluYL8asF3o6Fdzr VVSYlYiEZovRqbgemzsxXq2coNbSoCHS6SwaI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ngMCd6FSUJr4Dda8wfxNcQf+UpwSvdXyrK3pf5C20Xa1v8gpXZHXBwM99zzkVdMuPt qsycXOSeCuobwNRwGzl3bi4szaAhEJ78hq5FAfIQ4MTnbSZZoZH40tAmvTLOOYU4pLPv bVpwlCri0IWomKeiXeCYCXdlYfXY/wtCZmxYA= Received: by 10.216.1.77 with SMTP id 55mr2153974wec.72.1283636205641; Sat, 04 Sep 2010 14:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emmanuel-lecharnys-MacBook-Pro.local (ran75-1-78-192-106-184.fbxo.proxad.net [78.192.106.184]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w1sm2245298weq.1.2010.09.04.14.36.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 04 Sep 2010 14:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C82BCCE.2030908@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 23:40:30 +0200 From: Emmanuel Lecharny Reply-To: elecharny@apache.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: api@directory.apache.org Subject: Null DN constant Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, any preference between EMPTY_DN, NULL_DN or ROOT_DN for a null DN constant ? We currently use EMPTY_DN, but I'm inclined to also create a ROOT_DN constant as it's semantically different. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com