LOL. I think I have it already. I rather see him think it out and type the response. It was part in jest, I know he is pretty busy right now. He IM's me every few hours to tell me how busy he is and to tell me how much he hates that I have my IM set to always online. :o)
As Dean mentioned though, I wouldn't mind hearing your (Brett's) two cents on this as well. joe -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Wells Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 7:52 PM To: Send - AD mailing list Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... I'm guessing he would (be mad)... and, more to the point, why don't you chime in and toss out your 2 cents worth ... you know you have _an_ opinion on it ... ;-) -- Dean Wells MSEtechnology * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://msetechnology.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 7:47 PM To: [email protected] Cc: 'Eric Fleischman' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... Listed on my cell phone is "Online Help", it is a direct line to Eric, it will even find Eric at dinner (which is his current wherabouts). Do you want his cell phone? :> Cheers, -Brett P.S. - Debating if he'd be mad at me ... On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, joe wrote: > ping ~Eric > > > Pinging ~Eric.texas.cpr.microsoft.com [xx.xx.xx.xx] with 32 bytes of data: > > > > Request timed out. > > Request timed out. > > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:42 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > > Well that's why I did the ping. :o) > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric > Fleischman > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 3:37 PM > To: joe; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > > > 3 words: blah, blah and blah > > > > :) > > > > I'll try and revisit this sometime this week. Sorry, I lost track of it. > > > > ~Eric > > > > > > > > _____ > > From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 11:16 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Eric Fleischman > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > > > ping ~Eric > > > > Pinging ~Eric.texas.cpr.microsoft.com [xx.xx.xx.xx] with 32 bytes of data: > > > > Request timed out. > > Request timed out. > > > > > > > > :o) > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric > Fleischman > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 7:44 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > Let me digest a bit and report back. The answer is probably yes, I > just need to think about it. > > > > <aside> > > Have you noticed that every ldp snip I do is from a different domain? > Yes, I have that many forests in virtual machines. I just noticed that > I'm not sure if I've used the same one twice on this list... > > > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of listmail > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 5:30 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > > > Understood on the constructed. Though it makes you wonder why that one > is and whenChanged isn't. :o) > > > > How about the overall more general question, is there a way to > ascertain what would and wouldn't be displayed? For instance, is there > something "query-able" that tells me ntsecuritydescriptor would or > wouldn't be displayed. > > > > joe > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Eric Fleischman > Sent: Tue 11/9/2004 6:19 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > In this case: > > > > >> Dn: > CN=Modify-Time-Stamp,CN=Schema,CN=Configuration,DC=corp,DC=microsoft,D > C=com > > 1> lDAPDisplayName: modifyTimeStamp; > > 1> systemFlags: 0x8000014 = ( FLAG_ATTR_IS_CONSTRUCTED | > FLAG_SCHEMA_BASE_OBJECT | FLAG_DOMAIN_DISALLOW_RENAME ); > > > > Constructed attributes are only returned 1) If requested AND 2) if > requested in a base search against the object > > > > ~Eric > > > > > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of listmail > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 5:16 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > > > Nope. Not every attribute is returned. I don't know personally what > the logic is that specifies what is returned and what isn't. I would > like to think it is something you can query out of the schema but I > have never seen anything to substantiate that thought. > > > > It is easy to see it in action though, query the schema on 2K and do > the same on K3. You will certain attribs on certain objects returned > in 2K but not in K3, you have to ask for them meaning that MS backed > out the default return set. Why I don't know but helped someone with > an App that blew up because of it. I don't recall exactly what the > attribute was though, I purposely forgot it so I could have enough > room in my head to remember the thing about ntsecuritydescriptors... > > > > What about ntsecuritydescriptors you ask? ntsecuritydescriptor should > be on every object but when have you seen a query where you didn't > specifically specify you needed it that it did get returned? Answer, > you have to ask for it. > > > > With adfind you would do something like > > > > adfind -b <somebase> -f <somefilter> * ntsecuritydescriptor > > > > That will return what I call the * set (star set) and also the > ntsecuritydescriptor attribute. > > > > I started to talk to ~Eric about this once before but I don't think we > ever got to the part of the discussion concerning how it was > determined what is returned and what isn't. > > > > joe > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of AD > Sent: Tue 11/9/2004 6:00 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > Hmm, I am a little bit confused joe. I did not ask for > msExchAlObjectVersion but it returns it anyways. Isn't LDP suppose to > return every attribute that is set for a an object? > > > > Thanks > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of listmail > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:31 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > Because you didn't request it. That one needs to be specifically > requested, you can instead use whenChanged which is returned in the default * set. > > > > joe > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of AD > Sent: Tue 11/9/2004 4:24 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ActiveDir] LDP does not return modifyTimeStamp attribute... > > > > Does anyone know why LDP does not return the modifyTimeStamp attribute? > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
