[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIREVE-265?page=comments#action_12355866 ]
Alex Karasulu commented on DIREVE-265: -------------------------------------- You mean just adding bind() to what we have? I guess that's the only missing operation. However I think this is a wrong turn in our architectural vision. First because a partitions are for storage. Using them for proxying is tangential to our aims. A proxy can be implemented in other ways via views. Using a partition to do is effective but a hack. When we implement views proxies can easily be written. Still there may be some benefit to intercepting a bind operation. Let me think more about this. Bind interception might be good for views too. Thanks T. > delegating binds to custom partitions > ------------------------------------- > > Key: DIREVE-265 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIREVE-265 > Project: Directory Server > Type: New Feature > Components: server main > Environment: jdk1.4.2 > Reporter: Norbert Reilly > Assignee: Alex Karasulu > Attachments: delegate_bind.patch > > I have created a patch which permits SimpleAuthenticator to optionally > delegate bind calls to the custom partition matching the DN provided to a > bind call. This seems like the right general approach to take, but there were > some points I wasn't completely certain about (being a noob): > 1) I pass the credentials in as a Object (rather then byte[]) to allow > for future flexibility when SASL support is added to DS. > 2) The bind() call returns an InitialContext which SimpleAuthenticator > immediately closes, rather then say returning a boolean. This seems sensible > though. > 3) Given the new bind() call is only optionally implemented by a > ContextPartition, the default bases classes return null when it is called. A > NotImplementedException type approach would work just as well, but I am > unsure how the relative pros and cons are preceived by the core DS developers > (runtime cost versus cleanliness). > I also realise that the bind call is only one of a number of delegations that > will eventually need to be supported to custom partitions, but hope that this > patch isn't heading in the wrong direction and thus compromising any future > work that may be required. > If the patch is deemed useful, but further work is required due to any/all of > the reasons above (or some I haven't considered) then let me know. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
