Stefan Seelmann wrote:
3) LdapService
This class is now used only once in the ApacheDS class, as we don't need
to define one instance to manage LDAP and another one for LDAPS : both
are managed through a different transport. As a consequence, a flag is
removed (enableSSL) : this flag depends on the SSL enabled transport
presence.
The getPort() method has been completed with a getportSSL() which
returns the LDAPS associated transport port. The getPort() now returns
the port for the non SSL transport.
Would be good to rename it to _LdapServer_, just to be consistent to the
naming of the other servers.
Most certainly. At least, it will be consistent.
Now, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1140 did the exact
opposite move, I have no idea why...
4) ApacheDS
This class encapsulated the LdapServer and all the other servers. As a
direct consequence of the transports modifcations, I have move dmost of
the specific configuration up to the LdapService. The second impact is
that we don't need to instanciate twice the LdapService (one for LDAP
and anotherone for LDAPS), plus the reference to DirectoryService is now
useless, as it's already present in the unique LdapService instance.
Emmanuel and I just discussed on IRC, it should be possible to get rid
of the ApacheDS class because it just grouped the LdapServices.
Yop. Will do that.
o The LdapService bean has also been slighly modified, so that it can
LdapServer?
yes.
<dnsServer>
<tcpTransports>
<tcpTransport port="8053"/>
</tcpTransports>
<udpTransports>
<udpTransport port="8053"/>
</udpTransports>
<directoryService>#directoryService</directoryService>
</dnsServer>
This transports configuration looks a bit chatty. A simpler solution
could be:
<...Server>
<transports>
<tcpTransport .../>
<udpTransport .../>
</transports>
</...Server>
Or
<...Server>
<tcpTransport .../>
<udpTransport .../>
</...Server>
Sure ! Will do.
I suggest that we allow both syntax. if a server has only one transport
(for TCP/UDP), then the second syntax will be used. If a server can have
more than one syntax, then we will use the first one.
Thanks Stefan !
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
