Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Problem in Net::LDAP::FilterMatch?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Peter Marschall  
View profile  
 More options Apr 22 2012, 5:59 pm
Newsgroups: perl.ldap
From: pe...@adpm.de (Peter Marschall)
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 23:59:47 +0200
Local: Sun, Apr 22 2012 5:59 pm
Subject: Re: Problem in Net::LDAP::FilterMatch?

On Sunday, 22. April 2012, Alexei Znamensky wrote:
> Hi Peter,

> On 22 April 2012 15:10, Peter Marschall <pe...@adpm.de> wrote:
> > [...]

> In that case, why does Net::LDAP::Filter constructor accepts such filters
> as argument? Shouldn't it moan that this is illegal? It builds an object
> out of that filter. If that is not a legal filter, a Filter object should
> not be created out of it.

Net::LDAP::Filter only checks for "well-formedness".

> > LDAP RFCs do not define filters with DN on the left hand side.

> Is there a good reason for that?

I guess you need to aks that to the people who created the RFCs
(i.e. the standards) for LDAP.

One possible explatation might be:
If you have the name of the object, you can make a more efficient query:

        $ldap->search(base => $YOUR_KNOWN_DN,
                                filter => '(objectclass=*)',
                                scope => base);

I.e. you set the search base to your known DN, set the scope to 'base',
(i.e. only the object given as base) and query for all objects.
This gives you the most efficient query if you already know a DN.

=> Using the DN alone on the left hand side of a filter is simply not
necessary.

Chris,
I am fully aware of DN as part of the left hand side in extensible matches.
But in those cases the filter searches for specific values of RDNs as parts of
the DN, not the full DN.

> >  [...]
> > The filters using DN would fail on a standard LDAP server too.
> > Net::LDAP::FilterMatch behaves correctly.

> I was afraid that would be the case.

> I personally can see no reason why we should not be able to perform
> searches based on the object name. It seems silly that I can search by
> anything else but the very name of the object.

See above.

Best
Peter

--
Peter Marschall
pe...@adpm.de


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.