I think so - I realize that our OpenDS SDK needs to cope with this as
well :-(
It makes me wonder what else could be violated? Should we permit non-DNs
for all operations? E.g. modifying the entry "joe.blo...@example.com"?
It seems a bit inconsistent to be lax in only one part of the protocol
but not others. ;-)
My preference is to encourage conformance where possible. What other
known violations are there other than the bind DN?
Matt
On 23/02/10 17:33, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Hi,
M$, as usual, is violating many LDAP RFCs. For instance, you can send
a simple BindRequest where the user name is *not* a DN.
I guess we will have to bend the API to accept such crapity...
wdyt ?
<curse>M$</curse>
