> ----- "Emmanuel Lecharny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-just-ldapv3-rescodes-02.txt > > Iinternet Drafts are not authoritative sources of information. They should > never cited except as work-in-progress. No one seems to be questioning that > noSuchObject is a legitimate response code for LDAP searches.
It seems that Agarwal's LDAP admins are questionning this simple fact :) > The point is whether noSuchObject is appropriate for a search whose > searchBase exists. That's pretty clear it's not appropriate, RFC draft of not. However, it's still better to expose the fact that this point is being clarified in a RFC draft, for those who haven't been read extensively all the LDAP RFCs. May be the official drafts are not clear enough, too. > Ing. Pierangelo Masarati > OpenLDAP Core Team > > SysNet s.r.l. > via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA > http://www.sys-net.it > ----------------------------------- > Office: +39 02 23998309 > Mobile: +39 333 4963172 > Fax: +39 0382 476497 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----------------------------------- > > -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
