Re: OpenLDAP as an address book for MS Outlook

[Philip Guenther <guenther+ldaptech@sendmail.com>]

On Tue, 11 Dec 2012, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Philip Guenther wrote:
...
> > So, it would seem that a client should be able to portably request sorting 
> > on the cn attribute in a case-insensitive fashion by sending the control 
> > with that optional orderingRule filled in.  That should work against any 
> > server that supports the control and the desired case-insensitive rule.
> > 
> > It should be possible to test this against OpenLDAP with something like:
> > 
> > 	ldapsearch -E sss=cn:caseIgnoreOrderingMatch '(cn=*)' cn
> 
> Yes, this works on an unpatched slapd, even if I use "!sss". What is the 
> difference between this request and the bad one from Outlook (in plain 
> words, if you can, please).

The request above says:
	"fetch all entries that match the filter and sort them
	 on their cn attribute value using the rule called
	 caseIgnoreOrderingMatch"

The Outlook request is
	"fetch all entries that match the filter and sort them
	 on their cn attribute value using the default sorting
	 rule for the cn attribute, whatever that happens to be
	 on this server"


> If I wanted to reproduce the Outlook's incorrect request, what
> ldapsearch command line should that be?

Just leave out the explicit rule:
 	ldapsearch -E sss=cn '(cn=*)' cn

should do the trick.


> Also, do I understand correctly that if Outlook explicitely included an 
> orderingRule in its request, there would be no error from the server 
> even if the orderingRule for this attribute is not defined in the 
> schema?

That's how I understand it.


Philip Guenther