Re: Why does slapd need a searchbase?

["Jim Hud" <jdhz@btinternet.com>]

I understand and appreciate your response.  I like idea of a chain of
searchbases but I realise I am trying to fit the server to my particular
need and that it could be against the standard.  However, the standard is
not always right and common use should allow the standard to evolve
shouldn't it.

Kludge is a bit strong for defaultsearchbase.

When do you guys sleep?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
To: "Jim Hud" <jdhz@btinternet.com>
Cc: <openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 1:17 AM
Subject: Re: Why does slapd need a searchbase?


> At 11:37 PM 10/7/00 +0000, Jim Hud wrote:
> >Some LDAP servers seem not to require a searchbase
>
> The base DN is a required parameter of the search operation.
>
> Some servers may kludge an empty search base to some other
> DN.  So will OpenLDAP, if you provide a defaultSearchBase
> value.
>
> >and will return a mixed list of entries spanning a number of domains.
>
> >Why does OpenLdap need a searchbase, could it not "simply" scan all the
> >configured databases?
>
> If the server cannot find the base (or kludged base) of the search,
> it cannot return any entries.  If it does find the search base,
> it should return some set of entries along with search continuations.
> A client, hence, can do a subtree search which spans one or more
> servers, each with one or more databases.
>
> Some folks wish that OpenLDAP would internally chain requests
> between databases...  though this is likely something we'd consider
> for a major redesign of slapd... we're not ready to consider a major
> redesign of slapd just yet.
>
> Kurt
>
>
>