directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Boorshtein <>
Subject Re: Client library
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2005 22:39:57 GMT
Oh, and just as an aside the DSMLv2 problems were the primary reason
why I moved JDBC-LDAP off of JNDI in favor of JLDAP.


On 8/2/05, Marc Boorshtein <> wrote:
> Yes, that is the primary benefit.  The downside is that it tries to be
> a "JDBC" for the directory world, in which it does not do well.
> Seemingly straight forward tasks such as re binding on a connection
> are more difficult then they need to be.  The same is true with using
> the Compare operation.  My other major bief is that is abstracts away
> the error messages so you can't get the exact error code.  Finally
> even though it trys to be a "JDBC", you end up having to use protocol
> specific implementations for anything more then the most basic tasks,
> which eliminates the benefit of having a single interface for all
> directory-like protocols.  It also has some incredibly stupid rules
> around socket factories that have been quite limmiting for me in the
> past.
> Can you do everything with JNDI that you need in 99% of applications?
> Sure.  But it really depends on how well you know the LDAP protocol
> and how willing you are to deal with the oddities of JNDI.  I
> personally have found it to be an overweight setup for most work I do.
> A perfect example is the DSMLV2 JNDI provider.  To perform the not too
> entirely difficult act of generating and parsing XML you needed:
> 1.  mail.jar
> 2.  activation.jar
> 3.  bp.jar
> 4.  the dsmlv2 provider jar
> And even then you couldn't simply cast the provider to an ldap
> context, even though DSMLv2 is "LDAP in Drag" as I once heard someone
> from Novell call it.  (This is why JLDAP provides the ability to use a
> DSMLv2 & SPML based connection in the same way as you would an LDAP
> connection for synchronouse operations).
> Forgive my little rant :-)
> Marc
> On 8/2/05, David Boreham <> wrote:
> > Nick Faiz wrote:
> >
> > > JNDI has worked for me so far. I like it because it's out of the box,
> > > so to speak, in the jdk. :)
> >
> > Actually that is a benefit of JNDI, and the reason I used it in a recent
> > project.
> > I can't say I found the experience pleasant though ;)
> >
> >
> >

View raw message