Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of covener@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.211 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=mni2yzPIkuEDGFTs80h5gg/l0Ut2JiyexLNo2ufb+hS632RlcO51xDE6gw0gUX7VIk
         Z8fzhBc9+PTMGoeoEYvkpiErOeRoUaUx77SzkS8Wnnes/ViozabF4ooxLD6PvApSUE5r
         TgB9qGRWTrbqG4gSSSw6zZ/U8iJnMLA13KW3o=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1404e5911001221536m7dbed60ci2c2b2abae8f4b598@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20100111230832.8531023888E2@eris.apache.org>
	 <1404e5911001221536m7dbed60ci2c2b2abae8f4b598@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:44:20 -0500
Message-ID: <1404e5911001221544l12365ac2y790f03cdbd133b93@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r898102 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES
	include/ap_mmn.h include/util_ldap.h modules/ldap/util_ldap.c
From: Eric Covener <covener@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Eric Covener <covener@gmail.com> wrote:
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=898102&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Introduce new config option LDAPTimeout to set the timeout for operations
>> like bind and search.
>>
>> For operations other than search, the support of the timeout depends on the
>> LDAP SDK supporting LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT (e.g. OpenLDAP >= 2.4.4). An exception is
>> the ldap_simple_bind() in uldap_connection_open(): Here we put some extra
>> effort into detecting a timeout in a portable way, to catch an idle connection
>> having been dropped by a firewall.
>
> Does openldap without LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT use LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT
> for bind/connect, or is it just not manipulatable in this way before
> LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT?
>
> The SDK I'm familiar with supports neither, but I'm curious how
> unfortunate of a name the old directive has.

Whoops, another look at the patch and I think I'm misunderstanding
which OPT is which and maybe the directive names are fine.

-- 
Eric Covener
covener@gmail.com