This is sorta off topic. Although, I generally agree that OpenLDAP isn't exactly what I'm looking for in a directory server I'm curious to know WHY people don't like OpenLDAP.
For me, OpenLDAP is too static. If you want to configure a replica or modify access control, you have to modify slap.conf and restart. and restart. and restart?! When you rely on LDAP for enterprise authentication and centralized data storage, restarting is something you want to minimize as MUCH as possible. I'd also love to be able to prune and graft subtrees. I thought about creating my own LDAP implementation, but if you've ever looked at the protocol spec... if it wasn't derived from X.500, it would have been easier. Also, what language, C? Why not get involved with OpenLDAP to fix the issues people have with OpenLDAP rather than try building something from scratch? d! Henning Brauer wrote: > I'd just _love_ to get rid of OpenLDAP... > > ----- Forwarded message from Felix von Leitner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- > > From: Felix von Leitner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: djbdns list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: off-topic: tinyldap? > Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 06:24:48 +0200 > User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.16i > > I have been toying around with writing something like tinydns for LDAP. > I have looked at the RFC but gave up in disgust after about one day. > But the more I think about it, the more important the project looks to > me. > > Who knows enough about LDAP to help me do this? > > LDAP knows more advanced queries than DNS, so tinyldap would not be as > tiny as tinydns. But maybe it is possible to not implement ranged > queries and stuff. I'm not into LDAP deep enough to actually know, but > I hope to solicit enough good karma (and help!) from you guys to pull it > off. > > If you feel that you can help (or can talk me out of it or just want to > sound off), please reply to me, not to this mailing list. If enough > people mail me, I will set up a mailing list for the project. > > Felix > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > >
