directory-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <>
Subject Re: Custom LDAP partition and root/baseless searches
Date Thu, 19 May 2011 08:41:30 GMT
On 5/19/11 10:17 AM, Matt Doran wrote:
> Hi there,
> I'm using a *very* basic custom LDAP partition in Apache DS (it's an 
> older version 1.5.5, because at the time of writing this was the best 
> version to get a custom LDAP partition working).
> We are using this embedded in our product to mimic a "real" LDAP 
> server for a very specific purpose (mainly around authentication and a 
> very basic user attribute lookup).
> One of the services that is interacting with us now is performing a 
> root search (I'm not sure if that's the right term).   But basically 
> they are now doing a search without providing an search base DN (i.e. 
> the search base is empty "").  See the attached image for a part of 
> the wireshark dump for this search.
> The problem we're having is that when we receive this search, the 
> "search()" method of our custom LDAP partition is not being called.  I 
> haven't been able to find the answer in your docs (probably because I 
> don't know the terminology to search for :)
> So I'm wondering how we can hook into these baseless searches?   Is 
> there a way to set-up the partition so we will be passed these search 
> requests?
> Is there a way to "plug-in" to handle these searches and modify them 
> or direct them in some way to our custom partition.

'Root' searches are supposed to work well. The way it works is that it 
looks into all the naming contexts present in the RootDSE entry. I guess 
that you have such a naming context present, otherwise you would not be 
able to do any search in your specific partition.

It may be a bug in 1.5.5. I suggest you quickly do a test with the 
latest version (1.5.7) to see if the problem still exists (we fixed a 
large number of bugs between 1.5.5. and 1.5.7). If the proble still 
exists, then it's most certainly a bug and deserves a JIRA.

Emmanuel L├ęcharny

View raw message