directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: List operation
Date Sat, 15 Dec 2012 06:56:19 GMT
Le 12/15/12 7:35 AM, Howard Chu a écrit :
> Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> after havng done some cleanup for the Lookup and Search operation, I'm
>> looking at the List operation, and I wonder if we should not just get
>> rid of it, except on the JNDO layer ?
>>
>> The List operation is just a special form of teh Search operation, with
>> ONE_LEVEL scope and a (ObjectClass=*) filter.
>
> This is the same argument the original LDAP designers made, vs X.500
> with its List operation. I no longer remember all the pros and cons of
> this debate, but I have the feeling the X.500 guys had a good reason
> for including this operation in the original spec...

Probably this is the the reasons some guy wrote ths draft :
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lloyd-ldap-list-read-00

Also RFC 4511 mentions the List and Read operations :

" Note that an X.500 "list"-like operation can be emulated by the client
requesting a singleLevel Search operation with a filter checking for the
presence of the 'objectClass' attribute, and that an X.500 "read"-like
operation can be emulated by a baseObject Search operation with the same
filter."

At this point, having implemented this exact operation in the API (list
and lookup - for read ), I feel that we have covered the need... What I
just did internally is just to get rid of the code duplication we had
with this list not rerouting to a search immediately.

-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com 


Mime
View raw message