On Oct 16, 2008, at 1:19 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
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.
Actually, there are cases where it is appropriate. For instance, when
the user is not authorized to know if the searchBase exists. But this
case doesn't seem to apply here.
What should be clear is that by returning noSuchObject, the server is
reporting that the baseObject of the search does not exist. This
quite different than reporting there are no entries which match the
search criteria.
-- Kurt
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.
