Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:42 PM -0500 Bill Cole
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, I am looking here for an answer from the broad LDAP community to the
question in my Subject. I am concerned that while I may be trying to do
something that seems "right" based on my reading of RFC2247, I may have
missed something in my research and this may be conceptually broken.
While clearly I am doing something that is harder to get working than I
expected it to be, I am trying to not keep pounding away at trying to get
something to work that never will work or if I manage it, *shouldn't*
work.
The client tools are what is broken.
As it turns out, maybe not...
It is perfectly valid and
reasonable to use "" as the root of your LDAP tree. We do that at
Zimbra, for example, in part because we have plenty of clients who run
hosted mail servers, and need to support multiple domains.
That is the most helpful thing I've read in many days of combing through
software docs and RFC's and mailing list archives and the thin collection of
relevant things Google could find for me. Thank you!
I installed Zimbra just to see what exactly it was doing and it turns out
that my rushed analysis of why I was seeing breakage was wrong. The Apache
DS client and JXplorer see the Zimbra tree just fine, unphased by the null
root. Now I just have to figure out what the significant differences are
between the apparent mess I've created myself and the clearly functional
Zimbra structure or maybe just blow away my test system altogether and do a
cargo-cult cribbing from Zimbra, although that would be unsatisfying.
(and since I'm essentially a mail geek, I also have to resist the
distraction of having just installed a shiny new mail system that I've never
played with before, but that's more of a personal problem...)
